Why are steroids so bad?

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • jujuhound
    MVP
    • Oct 2002
    • 1040

    #61
    Re: Why are steroids so bad?

    Originally posted by glucklich
    I didnt read this whole post but the you started off with more recycled rebuttals. If you had something new to say, you should have bottom-lined it.
    Did you read even my first three lines? I started off by saying you haven't even responded to half the rebuttals that have been given. I guess your general refusal to make any distinctions with regard to anything causes you to think all responses against you are the same or "recycled".

    Comment

    • glucklich
      Banned
      • Jun 2004
      • 4272

      #62
      Re: Why are steroids so bad?

      Originally posted by jujuhound
      Did you read even my first three lines? I started off by saying you haven't even responded to half the rebuttals that have been given. I guess your general refusal to make any distinctions with regard to anything causes you to think all responses against you are the same or "recycled".

      I posted this in the other thread and the fact that similar dialogue in both threads exists, underscores my sentiment here:

      Think about what you are saying. Youre suggesting I have to have the exact same conversation over and over again every time someone chimes in with a rebuttal thats is essentially the same as one offered the first time around. Youre right it was a good discussion when CWood questioned my logic but please review what he said and come up with something new.

      Comment

      • glucklich
        Banned
        • Jun 2004
        • 4272

        #63
        Re: Why are steroids so bad?

        Originally posted by jujuhound
        Did you read even my first three lines? I started off by saying you haven't even responded to half the rebuttals that have been given. I guess your general refusal to make any distinctions with regard to anything causes you to think all responses against you are the same or "recycled".

        I posted this in the other thread and the fact that similar dialogue in both threads exists, underscores my sentiment here:

        Think about what you are saying. Youre suggesting I have to have the exact same conversation over and over again every time someone chimes in with a rebuttal thats is essentially the same as one offered the first time around. Youre right it was a good discussion when CWood questioned my logic but please review what he said and come up with something new.

        Comment

        • jujuhound
          MVP
          • Oct 2002
          • 1040

          #64
          Re: Why are steroids so bad?

          Originally posted by glucklich
          I posted this in the other thread and the fact that similar dialogue in both threads exists, underscores my sentiment here:

          Think about what you are saying. Youre suggesting I have to have the exact same conversation over and over again every time someone chimes in with a rebuttal thats is essentially the same as one offered the first time around. Youre right it was a good discussion when CWood questioned my logic but please review what he said and come up with something new.
          Try reading my post, o great, superior one.

          (1) I have a different take on your illegality claims,

          (2) I bring up your cortizone arugment again only b/c you have never addressed the counterargument to your claim (even with CWood), and

          (3) then I discussed your utter garbage about taking a stance over a matter of degree being silly or ridiculous or whatever you called it.

          You want us to read your many threads about the same thing, yet you won't even read my one post which takes the points I disagree with you about one by one.

          Comment

          • jujuhound
            MVP
            • Oct 2002
            • 1040

            #65
            Re: Why are steroids so bad?

            Originally posted by glucklich
            I posted this in the other thread and the fact that similar dialogue in both threads exists, underscores my sentiment here:

            Think about what you are saying. Youre suggesting I have to have the exact same conversation over and over again every time someone chimes in with a rebuttal thats is essentially the same as one offered the first time around. Youre right it was a good discussion when CWood questioned my logic but please review what he said and come up with something new.
            Try reading my post, o great, superior one.

            (1) I have a different take on your illegality claims,

            (2) I bring up your cortizone arugment again only b/c you have never addressed the counterargument to your claim (even with CWood), and

            (3) then I discussed your utter garbage about taking a stance over a matter of degree being silly or ridiculous or whatever you called it.

            You want us to read your many threads about the same thing, yet you won't even read my one post which takes the points I disagree with you about one by one.

            Comment

            • Heelfan71
              Hall Of Fame
              • Jul 2002
              • 19940

              #66
              Re: Why are steroids so bad?

              Steroids are bad because they give you huge gains in strength. Unfair gains for those who do work out and do it the legal way. Steroids are bad for any sport. Look at the olympic runners who have been caught. IT taints the sport.


              Steroids can't even be compaired to taking a Cortozone shot......apples and oranges.
              My Fan Page http://theusualgamer.net/MyFanPage_Heelfan71.aspx
              Heelfans Blog http://www.operationsports.com/Heelfan71/blog/

              Comment

              • Heelfan71
                Hall Of Fame
                • Jul 2002
                • 19940

                #67
                Re: Why are steroids so bad?

                Steroids are bad because they give you huge gains in strength. Unfair gains for those who do work out and do it the legal way. Steroids are bad for any sport. Look at the olympic runners who have been caught. IT taints the sport.


                Steroids can't even be compaired to taking a Cortozone shot......apples and oranges.
                My Fan Page http://theusualgamer.net/MyFanPage_Heelfan71.aspx
                Heelfans Blog http://www.operationsports.com/Heelfan71/blog/

                Comment

                • RoyalBoyle78
                  Aka."Footballforever"
                  • May 2003
                  • 23918

                  #68
                  Re: Why are steroids so bad?

                  Originally posted by glucklich
                  Understand that a part of me finds them disagreeable but on the other hand part of me says, "so what". If these guys are willing to suffer the consequences then whats the problem? People complain about the sancitity of records and such but why is this always a one-way street? Back in the day the mits didnt have fingers that were bound together yet no one ever questions batting averages from back in the day. The game has also become more integretated which might have affected the records pre 1947. No one ever complains tries to diminish the records from before this. Also, as I mentioned in the other thread, using drugs like cortizone to help players play through pain/injury is really not much different than steroids. I could be wrong on this but I think there is also more substantial proof regarding the negative effects of cortizone as Ive heard it erodes your cartilage. I remember hearing about how the Bears would shoot up Butkus with coritzone. The fact is that records are improved through improvements in technigue/technology all the time. Theres better equipment, training techniques, technique improvements in the activity itself, surgery to diminish the effect of injury...so doesnt it seem kind of arbitrary to draw the line at steroids?

                  Some actually seem more offended by steroids than gambling. At least with steroids you know the person is trying to excel whereas with gambling even if you only bet on your team you implicitly bet against them when you dont bet. In fact, steroids are kind of an insurance policy that a player is not likely to manipulate the outcome to lose or shave points. Why would someone subject themselves to the affects of steroids to do that?

                  Thoughts?
                  it's so bad cause when you use them in sports is called "CHEATING" there are great records in baseball that been standing for many, many years, and for people to use steriods to make there game better, it's just bad for sports. The older cause back in the day worked damn hard to play and even some played hurt, real hurt and those guys are warriors, unlike a lot of the babies in baseball these days, they get a cut on there finger and there out a week. Steriods is cheating and that the bottom line. Hey they want to use steriods go ahead, just don't using in my favorite sport.
                  N.Y Mets
                  N.Y Giants
                  N.Y Knicks
                  N.Y Islanders
                  Miami Hurricanes


                  Twitter - @RoyalBoyle78
                  XBOX LIVE - Royalboyle78
                  PSN - RoyalBoyle78

                  Comment

                  • RoyalBoyle78
                    Aka."Footballforever"
                    • May 2003
                    • 23918

                    #69
                    Re: Why are steroids so bad?

                    Originally posted by glucklich
                    Understand that a part of me finds them disagreeable but on the other hand part of me says, "so what". If these guys are willing to suffer the consequences then whats the problem? People complain about the sancitity of records and such but why is this always a one-way street? Back in the day the mits didnt have fingers that were bound together yet no one ever questions batting averages from back in the day. The game has also become more integretated which might have affected the records pre 1947. No one ever complains tries to diminish the records from before this. Also, as I mentioned in the other thread, using drugs like cortizone to help players play through pain/injury is really not much different than steroids. I could be wrong on this but I think there is also more substantial proof regarding the negative effects of cortizone as Ive heard it erodes your cartilage. I remember hearing about how the Bears would shoot up Butkus with coritzone. The fact is that records are improved through improvements in technigue/technology all the time. Theres better equipment, training techniques, technique improvements in the activity itself, surgery to diminish the effect of injury...so doesnt it seem kind of arbitrary to draw the line at steroids?

                    Some actually seem more offended by steroids than gambling. At least with steroids you know the person is trying to excel whereas with gambling even if you only bet on your team you implicitly bet against them when you dont bet. In fact, steroids are kind of an insurance policy that a player is not likely to manipulate the outcome to lose or shave points. Why would someone subject themselves to the affects of steroids to do that?

                    Thoughts?
                    it's so bad cause when you use them in sports is called "CHEATING" there are great records in baseball that been standing for many, many years, and for people to use steriods to make there game better, it's just bad for sports. The older cause back in the day worked damn hard to play and even some played hurt, real hurt and those guys are warriors, unlike a lot of the babies in baseball these days, they get a cut on there finger and there out a week. Steriods is cheating and that the bottom line. Hey they want to use steriods go ahead, just don't using in my favorite sport.
                    N.Y Mets
                    N.Y Giants
                    N.Y Knicks
                    N.Y Islanders
                    Miami Hurricanes


                    Twitter - @RoyalBoyle78
                    XBOX LIVE - Royalboyle78
                    PSN - RoyalBoyle78

                    Comment

                    • sput
                      Rookie
                      • Dec 2004
                      • 110

                      #70
                      Re: Why are steroids so bad?

                      jujuhound, it's no use, bring up an argument, actually put in your ideas and it's "already been done" and you "haven't paid attention to the thread." it's not worth the time.


                      -J
                      Watching IU games with a foreboding sense of doom since 1981

                      Comment

                      • sput
                        Rookie
                        • Dec 2004
                        • 110

                        #71
                        Re: Why are steroids so bad?

                        jujuhound, it's no use, bring up an argument, actually put in your ideas and it's "already been done" and you "haven't paid attention to the thread." it's not worth the time.


                        -J
                        Watching IU games with a foreboding sense of doom since 1981

                        Comment

                        • Misfit
                          All Star
                          • Mar 2003
                          • 5766

                          #72
                          Re: Why are steroids so bad?

                          This seems kind of silly to me. Everyone should ask themselves do we want MLB players on steroids?

                          I don't, whats the point? I want to see real people with real talent compete. We could build a machine that can throw a baseball 200mph, but that doesn't mean I want to see pitchers replaced with machines hurling 200mph fastballs. The steroids thing is the same deal. I don't want to see players on roids just because it makes them better than normal, It's not impressive.

                          And while I generally do not care much about the health of players, I would care if my son was raised in a world that encouraged him to damage his health with steroids if he wants to make big bucks. Steroids are illegal, if anyone here has a problem with how they are enforced then write a letter to your local congressman.

                          The issue of a cortizone shot is completely different. Cortizone blocks pain, it doesn't make a player better than he normally would be. If it did then players would be taking cortizone shots while completely healthy. Players taking these shots are not gaining a competetive advantage, because they are injured. Maybe taking a shot improves a player from 50% to 75% as theorized in another topic, but it doesn't make him 110%. It doesn't even make him perform at the same level he would if he were healthy. If a hitter can get around a fastball when he's only at 75% then good for him. I find if a player can peform at a high level while injured (regardless of whether or not the pain is blocked) impressive. I think most people do. As a culture, we don't find a roidhead impressive when he hits a ball 450 feet. We call him a cheater.

                          Comment

                          • Misfit
                            All Star
                            • Mar 2003
                            • 5766

                            #73
                            Re: Why are steroids so bad?

                            This seems kind of silly to me. Everyone should ask themselves do we want MLB players on steroids?

                            I don't, whats the point? I want to see real people with real talent compete. We could build a machine that can throw a baseball 200mph, but that doesn't mean I want to see pitchers replaced with machines hurling 200mph fastballs. The steroids thing is the same deal. I don't want to see players on roids just because it makes them better than normal, It's not impressive.

                            And while I generally do not care much about the health of players, I would care if my son was raised in a world that encouraged him to damage his health with steroids if he wants to make big bucks. Steroids are illegal, if anyone here has a problem with how they are enforced then write a letter to your local congressman.

                            The issue of a cortizone shot is completely different. Cortizone blocks pain, it doesn't make a player better than he normally would be. If it did then players would be taking cortizone shots while completely healthy. Players taking these shots are not gaining a competetive advantage, because they are injured. Maybe taking a shot improves a player from 50% to 75% as theorized in another topic, but it doesn't make him 110%. It doesn't even make him perform at the same level he would if he were healthy. If a hitter can get around a fastball when he's only at 75% then good for him. I find if a player can peform at a high level while injured (regardless of whether or not the pain is blocked) impressive. I think most people do. As a culture, we don't find a roidhead impressive when he hits a ball 450 feet. We call him a cheater.

                            Comment

                            • glucklich
                              Banned
                              • Jun 2004
                              • 4272

                              #74
                              Re: Why are steroids so bad?

                              Originally posted by Misfit

                              And while I generally do not care much about the health of players, I would care if my son was raised in a world that encouraged him to damage his health with steroids if he wants to make big bucks. Steroids are illegal, if anyone here has a problem with how they are enforced then write a letter to your local congressman.

                              The issue of a cortizone shot is completely different. Cortizone blocks pain, it doesn't make a player better than he normally would be. If it did then players would be taking cortizone shots while completely healthy. Players taking these shots are not gaining a competetive advantage, because they are injured. Maybe taking a shot improves a player from 50% to 75% as theorized in another topic, but it doesn't make him 110%. It doesn't even make him perform at the same level he would if he were healthy. If a hitter can get around a fastball when he's only at 75% then good for him. I find if a player can peform at a high level while injured (regardless of whether or not the pain is blocked) impressive. I think most people do. As a culture, we don't find a roidhead impressive when he hits a ball 450 feet. We call him a cheater.
                              Well considering the enforcement the vast majority of the time has been minimal, maybe you should write your congressman, especially since you are reliant on others to raise your kid.

                              The 50% you speak of is 100% at that point in time...sometimes 100% today is 50% of yesterday...and thats the point you cant navigate around.
                              Last edited by glucklich; 02-17-2005, 06:31 PM.

                              Comment

                              • glucklich
                                Banned
                                • Jun 2004
                                • 4272

                                #75
                                Re: Why are steroids so bad?

                                Originally posted by Misfit

                                And while I generally do not care much about the health of players, I would care if my son was raised in a world that encouraged him to damage his health with steroids if he wants to make big bucks. Steroids are illegal, if anyone here has a problem with how they are enforced then write a letter to your local congressman.

                                The issue of a cortizone shot is completely different. Cortizone blocks pain, it doesn't make a player better than he normally would be. If it did then players would be taking cortizone shots while completely healthy. Players taking these shots are not gaining a competetive advantage, because they are injured. Maybe taking a shot improves a player from 50% to 75% as theorized in another topic, but it doesn't make him 110%. It doesn't even make him perform at the same level he would if he were healthy. If a hitter can get around a fastball when he's only at 75% then good for him. I find if a player can peform at a high level while injured (regardless of whether or not the pain is blocked) impressive. I think most people do. As a culture, we don't find a roidhead impressive when he hits a ball 450 feet. We call him a cheater.
                                Well considering the enforcement the vast majority of the time has been minimal, maybe you should write your congressman, especially since you are reliant on others to raise your kid.

                                The 50% you speak of is 100% at that point in time...sometimes 100% today is 50% of yesterday...and thats the point you cant navigate around.

                                Comment

                                Working...