Pete Rose, Gambling, PEDs

[southsider2k5]

When did they remove Ty Cobb from the HOF?

 

When did Ty Cobb bet on baseball?

[witesoxfan]

When did they remove Ty Cobb from the HOF?

 

He was apart of the inaugural class of Hall of Famers. Back in 1936, they must have felt that his contributions on the field outweighed the POS he was on the field. Considering it was before WWII and a black person had never played in the majors up to that point, I'm guessing their idea of morals and ethics were slightly different than ours are today.

[southsider2k5]

He was apart of the inaugural class of Hall of Famers. Back in 1936, they must have felt that his contributions on the field outweighed the POS he was on the field. Considering it was before WWII and a black person had never played in the majors up to that point, I'm guessing their idea of morals and ethics were slightly different than ours are today.

 

Plus the defined morality clause didn't come along until 1944.

[Kyyle23]

I know this topic has been brought up numerous times over the year, and several times over the last 60 days, but again how is this guy not a hot commodity right now? He hasn't really slowed down much since May 31st, and although his power numbers have dipped since the ASB he is still productive.

 

Is this a case of just pure caution? Is it his contract? Is it just teams holding off until the very last minute to avoid giving their competition a chance to react? I guess I'm just surprised by the lack of activity. Maybe not surprised nothing has happened but to just hear crickets regarding any trades at all. The whole story at the deadline was the deadline is too early now because of the 2nd wild card and too many teams were in the race so the August deadline would have some excitement. Now I think it is more defined as to who is in it and it is too quiet.

 

Hey, we are arguing about gambling here. Any attempts to stay on thread topic will be ignored and further subject to instant banning

[Vance Law]

Im sure a compulsive gambler wouldnt do anything to affect a bet he made when he has full control of the game. Nothing at all.

 

Where you two seem to be talking right past each other is on the point that Rose never bet on his team to lose. If he was doing anything to "affect the game", it was to win. Just like a non-gambling player.

 

[Kyyle23]

Where you two seem to be talking right past each other is on the point that Rose never bet on his team to lose. If he was doing anything to "affect the game", it was to win. Just like a non-gambling player.

 

His story has changed so many times, I dont believe that for one minute. He was a gambler, pure and simple, anything for an edge.

[TheBigHurtIsBack]

He gives 100% effort in games where he bet on his team to win, and gives less than 100% effort in games where he bet his team to lose (or didn't bet at all).

 

As manager, he can make sure he has his best bullpen pitchers rested for games he bet his team to win.

 

PED's can physically alter your ability and allow you to go above and beyond your natural ability. Gambling on games can't. I don't know how I can be any clearer. What you are suggesting is absurd.

 

 

It isn't an agree or disagree thing.

 

Yes, it is. I disagree if the premise here is that your productivity on the baseball field as a player is not the be-all, end-all reasoning behind being in the hall of fame. Again, sports stars are not automatically role models. Just because they base their voting on something doesn't mean I have to agree with it. Period. Again, simply being written as a rule or law does not automatically make it right, or sensible. Whether or not the premise is indeed that is for another discussion, but my point stands. In my opinion, the all-time hits leader, who did nothing illegal or physically ability-altering to directly achieve that, should be in the hall of fame. That's my opinion and it's perfectly reasonable.

Edited August 23, 2013 by TheBigHurtIsBack

[witesoxfan]

Yes, it is. I disagree if the premise here is that your productivity on the baseball field as a player is not the be-all, end-all reasoning behind being in the hall of fame. Again, sports stars are not automatically role models. Just because they base their voting on something doesn't mean I have to agree with it. Period. Again, simply being written as a rule or law does not automatically make it right, or sensible. Whether or not the premise is indeed that is for another discussion, but my point stands. In my opinion, the all-time hits leader, who did nothing illegal or physically ability-altering to directly achieve that, should be in the hall of fame. That's my opinion and it's perfectly reasonable.

 

Except, within the rules of baseball, he did do something illegal, so that point does not stand. If I walked into a non-smoking bar smoking a cigarette, I would be told to put it out or face persecution. It doesn't mean I can't smoke anywhere else, I just can't smoke in that bar. To the same degree, Pete Rose could and can gamble all he wants to, he just can't gamble on baseball as a player.

 

Now, if you want to have a philosophical debate on the morals of gambling, you can go ahead and do that.

[StrangeSox]

Why are we assuming Rose wasn't using some form of PEDs? Wasn't the use of amphetamines/coke pretty common back then?

[witesoxfan]

Why are we assuming Rose wasn't using some form of PEDs? Wasn't the use of amphetamines/coke pretty common back then?

 

LOL, forgot about that

 

http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2006Oct02/0,4...tterman,00.html

[iamshack]

Except, within the rules of baseball, he did do something illegal, so that point does not stand. If I walked into a non-smoking bar smoking a cigarette, I would be told to put it out or face persecution. It doesn't mean I can't smoke anywhere else, I just can't smoke in that bar. To the same degree, Pete Rose could and can gamble all he wants to, he just can't gamble on baseball as a player.

 

Now, if you want to have a philosophical debate on the morals of gambling, you can go ahead and do that.

Actually, gambling on baseball outside of the state of Nevada was illegal at that time as well.

[witesoxfan]

Actually, gambling on baseball outside of the state of Nevada was illegal at that time as well.

 

So basically Rose is f***ed no matter how you slice it

[Kyyle23]

So basically Rose is f***ed no matter how you slice it

 

he got a lot of hits so who cares everything else is irrelevant and inconsequential

[LittleHurt05]

Why are we assuming Rose wasn't using some form of PEDs? Wasn't the use of amphetamines/coke pretty common back then?

 

I always wonder the same thing about Aaron, Maris, all the guys from the past. They were legal and accepted back then, and they definitely help over the course of a long season. Yet nobody seems to care.

[TheBigHurtIsBack]

Except, within the rules of baseball, he did do something illegal, so that point does not stand. If I walked into a non-smoking bar smoking a cigarette, I would be told to put it out or face persecution. It doesn't mean I can't smoke anywhere else, I just can't smoke in that bar. To the same degree, Pete Rose could and can gamble all he wants to, he just can't gamble on baseball as a player.

 

Now, if you want to have a philosophical debate on the morals of gambling, you can go ahead and do that.

 

Sure, it was illegal. My point is it was in no way related to his production on the field, at least in terms of raising his ceiling. PED's can do that, gambling can't magically make you better than you are. Pretty simple concept. I am pretty hefty on morals, believe it or not. But in my opinion it's irrelevant.

 

 

 

Why are we assuming Rose wasn't using some form of PEDs? Wasn't the use of amphetamines/coke pretty common back then?

 

Granted, and I meant to say, "supposedly" when referencing him being clean, but as long as he's been around there's been no proof so we can't hold that against him, otherwise by that logic no big hitter would be above suspicion.

[southsider2k5]

Why are we assuming Rose wasn't using some form of PEDs? Wasn't the use of amphetamines/coke pretty common back then?

 

The idea of 'strength' in baseball is a fairly recent phenomenon in terms of baseball history. I remember reading a book about Nolan Ryan a long time ago, which said that the Angels didn't even have a weightroom when he pitched there, and that he pretty well made one there, and was the only guy using it. The idea was that bulk was bad then. It makes me think steroids wouldn't have been used then. Speed was definitely around then, it is well documented. Coke, I am not sure if that would be considered a positive honestly.

[StrangeSox]

The idea of 'strength' in baseball is a fairly recent phenomenon in terms of baseball history. I remember reading a book about Nolan Ryan a long time ago, which said that the Angels didn't even have a weightroom when he pitched there, and that he pretty well made one there, and was the only guy using it. The idea was that bulk was bad then. It makes me think steroids wouldn't have been used then. Speed was definitely around then, it is well documented. Coke, I am not sure if that would be considered a positive honestly.

I didn't mean steroids, but any type of performance-enhancing drug., which would include speed/amphetamine/greenies.

[southsider2k5]

I didn't mean steroids, but any type of performance-enhancing drug., which would include speed/amphetamine/greenies.

 

That is all the same thing.

[ptatc]

Why are we assuming Rose wasn't using some form of PEDs? Wasn't the use of amphetamines/coke pretty common back then?

Amphetamines were very common even into the 90's. When I was working in the clubhouse there would be two coffee pots. One labeled leaded, one unleaded. Most people would assume it meant caffienated and decaf. It really stood for amphetamine laced or not. There was really mixed opinion on whether it helped. It helped to keep you going during the long season especially at the end. However, it also made you "jumpy" which didn't always help when trying to hit.

 

I said when the PEDs were banned that banning amphetamines would have a grewater effect than others because of the widespread use. I though it would take out older players because of the long season. I'm not sure if it's true today but I think the age is getting younger.

[ptatc]

Sure, it was illegal. My point is it was in no way related to his production on the field, at least in terms of raising his ceiling. PED's can do that, gambling can't magically make you better than you are. Pretty simple concept. I am pretty hefty on morals, believe it or not. But in my opinion it's irrelevant.

 

 

 

 

 

Granted, and I meant to say, "supposedly" when referencing him being clean, but as long as he's been around there's been no proof so we can't hold that against him, otherwise by that logic no big hitter would be above suspicion.

It may be worse to intentionally throw a game because of wagering or in the case of managing wear out a pitching staff because you have to win the bet on the game today.

 

PEDs can alter your ceiling physically. Changing the way you play because you placed a bet is a mental way of changing the performance. Either way you changed the way you would normally play.

 

Both are really bad for fair competitive based sports.

[StrangeSox]

I've read multiple times over the years that the rate of diagnosis for ADHD among MLB players is way higher than the general population rate. The belief is that they seek this diagnosis so that they can take the various highly stimulative drugs used to treat it. A modern, completely legal alternative to amphetamines.

[ptatc]

I've read multiple times over the years that the rate of diagnosis for ADHD among MLB players is way higher than the general population rate. The belief is that they seek this diagnosis so that they can take the various highly stimulative drugs used to treat it. A modern, completely legal alternative to amphetamines.

It's not for the stimulant, it's for the increased focus component that works with ADHD. If you have ADHD the drugs decrease the hyperactivity and allow the student to focus. The problem is with people you don't truly have the ADHD it can cause increased hyperactivity (similar to the stimulant) however, it cause many to lose focus and just be hyper. So many try but many also stop because it doesn't help.

[Jake]

It's not for the stimulant, it's for the increased focus component that works with ADHD. If you have ADHD the drugs decrease the hyperactivity and allow the student to focus. The problem is with people you don't truly have the ADHD it can cause increased hyperactivity (similar to the stimulant) however, it cause many to lose focus and just be hyper. So many try but many also stop because it doesn't help.

 

Yes, I have recently been diagnosed with ADHD and I have found amphetamine drugs to be very soothing for me. "Normal" people would not get this effect in most cases

[greg775]

I've read multiple times over the years that the rate of diagnosis for ADHD among MLB players is way higher than the general population rate. The belief is that they seek this diagnosis so that they can take the various highly stimulative drugs used to treat it. A modern, completely legal alternative to amphetamines.

 

Geez. Ballplayers are sick if this is true. Some apparently will do anything to get the edge. I know the season is long, really long, and they get tired but just play the game the best you can drug-free. My gawd.

[Balta1701]

Geez. Ballplayers are sick if this is true. Some apparently will do anything to get the edge. I know the season is long, really long, and they get tired but just play the game the best you can drug-free. My gawd.

Oh, so now you're opposed to guys doing whatever they can to win and giving it their all