BALCO, Baseball and the Leaky Faucet
Drip, drip, drip. You might think that’s the sound as more names associated with the infamous Operacion Puerto the Endless keep coming out. But these days, it’s the sound as a couple of more names of baseball players who tested positive for … um … well … um … something … back in 2003 have been leaked to the press. The latest players to make professional baseball’s performance enhancing drug use “honor roll” are David Ortiz and Manny Ramirez, who were both playing for the Boston Red Sox at the time. About two weeks ago, The New York Times reported that the Ortiz’s and Ramirez’s names were among the 104 names of players are somehow connected to positive tests that year.
Their names — assuming the two players are really on the list — and all the others were supposed to remain anonymous (and the list, itself, destroyed) at the end of the 2003 season. But a certain other investigation, known as BALCO, got in the way. Testing during the 2003 season was aimed at determining just how prevalent performance enhancing drugs were in the major leagues.
If the percentage exceeded a certain threshold, more stringent testing would occur. Lo and behold, the numbers came up high enough that the following season such a program was put into place. By comparison to the World Anti-Doping Agency’s system, the penalties in baseball (and basketball and American-style football) are pretty moderate. Still, in any one of these programs, if an athlete gets caught, he’s going to forfeit a substantial chunk of his paycheck during his unpaid leave of absence.
In the Times’ original story about Ortiz and Ramirez, Ortiz was quoted as saying,
One, I have already contacted the players association to confirm if this report is true. I have just been told that the report is true. Based on the way I have lived my life, I am surprised to learn I tested positive. Two, I will find out what I tested positive for. And, three, based on whatever I learn, I will share this information with my club and the public.
On the other hand, Ramirez (who served a 50-game suspension earlier this season) said,
You guys want to talk about the game, what is happening now, we can sit down and talk for two hours. If you want more information, call the union.
A bit more than a week later, Ortiz more or less made good on his promise by holding a press conference. Judging by the reports, though, Ortiz didn’t specifically state what he’d tested positive for. It’s not clear, from the articles I’ve read, whether he knows exactly what banned substance he tested positive for, but he did offer up an explanation. According to MLB.com:
“I consider myself one of those guys who were definitely a little bit careless back in the days when I was buying supplements — legal supplements — over the counter,” Ortiz said at a Yankee Stadium press conference. “But I never bought steroids or used steroids. I never thought buying supplements was going to hurt somebody’s feelings. If that happened, I’m sorry about it.
“This last week has been a major distraction. I want to apologize to my fans, my teammates, my manager, the owners, everybody for that situation.”
All of which makes it sound like he didn’t check the ingredients of those supplements and vitamins. MLB.com goes on to point out that names on the 2003 honor roll (a/k/a the list of names that stems from evidence seized during the BALCO investigation) are supposed to be sealed by court order, as is the information about what those players allegedly tested positive for. According to Michael Weiner, who is the new head of the player’s union, the result is that
… any union member alleged to have tested positive in 2003 because his name supposedly appears on some list — most recently David Ortiz and Manny Ramirez — finds himself in an extremely unfair position; his reputation has been threatened by a violation of the court’s orders, but respect for those orders now leaves him without access to the information that might permit him to restore his good name …
Tell that to the cyclists whose names have been linked to doping allegations over the past umpteen years. For any athlete in any sport, the mere suggestion or hint of a doping allegation is enough to seriously damage his or her career, endorsements and future earning potential, not to mention reputation. And, once tarred and feathered, the athlete’s reputation and good name are basically kaput — regardless of whether the allegations are true. Interestingly, in a follow-up article, writer Michael S. Schmidt (who broke the original story) speculates
… Ortiz was probably using the supplement 19-norandrostenedione, which converts to the powerful steroid nandrolone in the liver but was not banned by baseball at the time.
Really? Because there are plenty of other ingredients in various supplements that could run afoul of whatever testing was actually conducted in 2003. What we know about the program is that steroids were a main focus of the testing. Whether or not they were the only focus isn’t quite so clear. And exactly what kinds of testing was conducted is similarly unclear. Although no one has said exactly what Ortiz or Ramirez tested positive for (steroids is the presumption), it kind of sounds like Schmidt knows a bit more about the allegations against Ortiz and Ramirez than he’s let on. That, or he’s whistling in the dark.
Whether the allegations are true or not, time will tell. It’s a shame, though, that these two players have to answer allegations without knowing exactly what banned drug or supplement they’re alleged to have used. Six years on, unless a player keeps some sort of log of the supplements and other performance aids he used, I would suspect he wouldn’t remember exactly what he took, either.
And positive tests don’t just occur in cycling or baseball, either
Meanwhile, professional basketball player Rashard Lewis tested positive for what at least one news outlet called “elevated testosterone levels.” Lewis, who is a forward for the Orlando Magic, took responsibility for the test result and issued the following statement:
“Toward the end of the season I took an over-the-counter supplement which at the time I did not realize included a substance banned by the NBA,” Lewis said. “I hope every athlete can learn from my mistake that supplements, no matter how innocent they seem, should only be taken after consulting an expert in the field.”
Lewis, who’s played in the NBA for 11 seasons, will be suspended for the first 10 games of the upcoming season. By missing those games, he will forfeit about $1.6 million of his salary.
The US Anti-Doping Agency’s Travis Tygart said in response to news of Lewis’ suspension:
“There is a significant portion of the supplement industry that is profiting off the backs of our athletes and compromising the integrity of our national sports. The system needs to change to better protect all consumers.”
Lewis also said, in his statement published in the Orlando Magic section of the NBA.com web site:
I apologize to Magic fans, my teammates and this organization for not doing the research that should come with good judgment.
I hope this unintentional mistake will not reflect poorly on our team and its great character.
However Lewis came to test positive, and whatever test it was that showed “elevated testosterone levels,” he’s learned an important lesson. Don’t fight City Hall. They always win. It’s better to accept the suspension and move forward. By doing so, he’s minimized the damage to his reputation and career.
As a footnote, given the way other Times reporters have written about doping, the phrase “elevated testosterone levels” makes it sound to me like Lewis exceeded the allowable testosterone/epitestosterone ratio, not the actual allowable amount of testosterone in his system. But that point is probably moot, as it’s unlikely that any of Lewis’ testing data or records will ever reach the media or be available for interested fans to see.
On Lewis: I’m surprised we haven’t seen more doping cases in pro basketball. These guys are HUGE. They are told in college that they need to put on muscle mass in order to survive and succeed. Moreover, I’d imagine that guys that tall might have trouble putting on muscle (ectomorphs?).
But I’m here to rant about David Ortiz.
David Ortiz may be guilty as sin. He may have taken a truckload of performance-enhancing drugs over the years. But what is happening to Ortiz is way, WAY more unfair than anything Floyd Landis ever faced.
We know little about the testing performed by baseball in 2003. But we can guess that they performed the T/E tests we read so much about in the Landis case. We know from the Landis case that T/E tests aren’t terribly good — they were used in the Landis case for screening purposes, to see if further tests might be warranted. No one today would rely exclusively on T/E testing to prove a doping offense.
Moreover, the testing performed by baseball was never intended to prove whether a particular individual was doping — it was intended to get a rough count of how many baseball players were using steroids. I think the scientists here could tell us that a test designed to determine characteristics of a population in general cannot be relied upon to determine with certainty the characteristics of any member of the population. Think about it: if you wanted to figure out what percentage of Americans cheat on their income taxes, you might perform a survey, perhaps by phone, perhaps by mail. But you would not then throw Joe Blow in jail five years later based on the survey records of Joe Blow’s answers to your survey questions.
Finally, you have the gross unfairness reported above, that Ortiz can have NO access to any of the information regarding his supposed positive test. Contrast Ortiz’s situation with Floyd Landis: while few of us were satisfied with the procedures in the Landis case, Landis at least had access to hundreds of pages of test results.
I have read more than my share of comments over the years intimating that what happened to Landis was a product of FRENCH labs and EURO ADAs, and that the process that led to Landis’ suspension was somehow, well, un-American. Well, well. The Ortiz mess is 100% made in the U.S.A. It seems like Americans were somewhat uncomfortable about doping convictions born in Paris and sealed in arbitration but we don’t seem the least bit uncomfortable with convictions that begin and end in the press, in the “court” of public opinion. So much for any American claim that American anti-doping procedures are fair or just.
The saddest thing about the Ortiz mess is that no one seems willing to take his side. Before this mess, Ortiz was among the most beloved of baseball players. Now, even the press and bloggers in his home city of Boston have turned against him. It is taken as a given that the 2003 test results are unquestionable, and that Ortiz is some kind of a doper. And who knows, perhaps he is, but the stuff circulating in the newspapers is far from definitive. The evidence against Ortiz is much, MUCH thinner than the evidence USADA had against Landis.
Hell. At least Landis had a fairness fund, and defenders.
Larry,
Excellent points. The evidence against Ortiz is thinner than a sheet of tracing paper, yet we even have a journalist speculating on exactly what Ortiz tested positive for (even though that information is supposed to be under lock and key). When you said
you’re touching on something I plan on elaborating on in a future post. Certain things do seem to be taken (by the mainstream press, anyway) as unquestionable or infallible. In Floyd’s case, we saw a lot of documentation that at least draws some of that into question — regardless of how the arbitrators ultimately came to their conclusions.
Ortiz may or may not be guilty of taking some sort of substance which resulted in some sort of positive test result. The shame of it all is, we’ll never know. And a bigger shame is to see people turn against him based on flimsier accusations than those leveled at Floyd. Even if it turns out his name isn’t on that list, or if it turns out that he tested positive for something rather innocuous, the damage is already done.
Psychologists often note that what people remember is based on “primacy” over “recency.” Or, put another way, what most people hear first is what they will remember.
If Ortiz is innocent, he’s getting shafted big-time. And the damage already done can never be truly undone. That bites.
I wonder to what extent the OTC supplement industry needs to be investigated. While I suspect that a significant amount of athletes claiming positive tests are result of taking such supplements without suitable caution are putting spin on their behavior, the fact remains that apparently there are OTC products which contain banned PEDs. Now, we may not care all that much if Rodney Gymrat takes some supplement to buff up his bod to increase his score with the ladies, or if Suzy Sweetness takes something, hoping to drop some pounds and catch a man; but such products apparently are out there and it is not all that clear that it is easy, or indeed, possible for the average Joe to know what is what from reading the label. A top pro or even a US team level athlete could perhaps attempt to vet a product with his coach or team medical staff, but what about your average Cat 3 rider looking for a little legal advantage by taking vitamins or whatever and inadvertently ends up taking some banned substance? And then suppose this rider improves to the point he is riding in events where he is likely to be tested, still taking the supplement. Now he gets caught, not ever intending to be a cheater. We have seen this before: the skier and the inhaler for example.
And we also know that some OTC products have proven to be somewhat dangerous.
Finally, there is the attitude that physical improvement, weight loss, etc. can easily be had out of a bottle. Just take this and you’ll look like Arnold in his prime, be ready able and willing to service, and have beaucoup ladies lining up for your services. Apparently enough people fall for this to make the industry profitable.
Larry,
Good points. To say it’s just a French problem and what happened to Floyd would never happen here is to not understand the problem. Though I do hope no one can go back through the comments and find that I said it was purely a French problem.
One could argue that if we stuck to what is more the “American” way of law, at least originally, then it shouldn’t happen here. But nothing’s perfect, some things are slipping, and it’s nearly impossible to stop the court of public opinion.
There’s often a discrepancy between what is supposed to happen and what does happen. Doesn’t mean the “American” way is wrong, just imperfect.
Personally, I think things are just going to get worse as science learns more and we question even more just what is human.
Larry, I don’t disagree with anything you say. I don’t follow MLB and know little about many of the details. However, there are two things distinguishing Landis’ situation and Ortiz’:
1. I’m not sure Ortiz had been deprived of anything (except some public good will.)
2. Ortiz is a member of a union.
But in the end, “chicks love the long ball.” But then the guy that’s hit the most dingers in history can’t seem to find a job in the industry either. America’s pastime? Yeah, that would be the sport of hypocrisy.
8-0, Ortiz has not been deprived of anything tangible yet. There are a bunch of intangibles involved, such as pride, peace of mind and the respect of peers and fans. But ultimately, Ortiz will lose endorsement money, and may lose what was (I think) a sure spot in baseball’s hall of fame.
As for Ortiz’s membership in a union … well, can you can point out to me any way that this is helping him at the moment?
8-0, one other thought about the impact on Ortiz. A good baseball player like Ortiz will receive the bulk of his salary in the second half of his career. Baseball salaries are guaranteed, so players seek long-term contracts at their career peaks. Ortiz is probably past his peak performance, but the rule still holds: much of the value in Ortiz’s next contract will be measured by the length of the contract. So Ortiz wants to do all he can to prove his longevity. If Ortiz’s team comes to believe that he was doping earlier in his career, they will doubt whether he has much longevity left in him. Instead of getting a five or six year contract, he may end up with a three year contract. This could cost Ortiz tens of millions of dollars.
Yep, it could cost Ortiz. It might become a problem. Nothing has been taken from him yet. Then ticket to Cooperstown is sounding pretty speculative. All this in stark contrast to what ASO/UCI/LNDD and the Fench Tabloid L’Equipe pulled hours after the finish of the 2006 TdF to Landis and his team. I’m not exactly sure, but I suspect even Floyd’s *teammates* didn’t get paid salary; for sure they never got any of the prize money.
Maybe this is just a cultural thing to me, but what do you think Ortiz’ current net worth is? A few tens of millions? At what point is enough enough? Sure, there is the legacy thing in the hall, and not being an *. Suppose this ultimately costs him tens of millions. He still has tens of millions in the bank. And ya know – if he really did dope, and made those tens of millions by cheating…what then? I’m a big believer in due process, but it seems to me we are still in FRCP 12.b.6 territory on Ortiz. Floyd has a destoyed career, empty bank account, and lots of personal carnage I don’t wish to reiterate here.
Ortiz at least has a phone number to call for his union rep, and he is at least part of a collective bargaining agreement. Is that helping him? Don’t know. *Should* it be helping him? As far as I can tell, the only thing that has happened to Ortiz is someone at the NY Times published an article. If that was all L’Equipe did to Landis, we’d be likely talking about his 4th consecutive win at the tour last month. Heck, that’s all that did ever happended to Armstrong, and the rest, as they say, is history.
Argh…not disagreeing with you, and I’m not sure what my point is. Lots of distinguishing factors though.
My understanding is that nothing official can be done to Ortiz, because the testing was done only to determine the extent of drug usage in MLB, and I kind of think I read that steroid use was not actually banned in MLB at the time, but perhaps I am wrong about that. On the other hand, he doesn’t have much chance to clear his name either. He can’t get access to any info on his testing, so he can’t tell if the lab screwed up in some way. He might have a cause of action to sue whoever was responsible for the leak and whoever published the info,, but I am not sure if he has any cause of action to get the testing itself into court to challenge the results (assuming that he was actually clean at the time and the test results are wrong).
So he is kind of hanging in limbo: he can’t clear his name, only make protestations about his innocence; while others can refer to this accusation and possibly use it to keep him out of the HOF and/or to limit any contract he may have in the future.
And what was the point of publishing these 2 names out of the many who apparently were tested at the time? Is this some nasty part of the Yankee-Bosox rivalry?
Doping Labs*
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kohl-confirms-manager-bribed-anti-doping-labs
Not sure why you need to bribe a doping lab when you could simply pay to have samples analyzed.
8-0, Are you kidding? You bribe to keep from testing positive. Or maybe you PAY so someone else DOES test positive…..
If Kohl &/or his ex-manager have proof of this bribing, then ANY test of ANY athlete at the labs in question have to BE THROWN OUT. They are ALL SUSPECT. IF LNDD is one of the labs, then Floyd’s case & all other ‘positives’ declared there should be null & void.
This is a big, big story. WADA should be upchucking as we speak. Who knows, maybe WADA has known about this for months/years & has been paying off its own bribes to keep it silent. Sort of like the freakin VATICAN…. Tooooo bad WADA does not have THEIR money to “settle” lawsuits. This is gonna get ‘good’…..
Well, read the article. The allegation from Kohl is not that the bribes were to mis-analyze the samples, but to have them accurately analyzed so as to determine threshhold limits for doping.
But yeah, if there is evidence that lab managers manipulated lab processes in return for direct cash, we’d have a bona-fide story. Maybe this is what was meant by “they use their experience” in testing stuff.
I suspect the bribes were necessary because the lab either know or was likely to figure out that there was a nefarious purpose to these tests. I wouldn’t think that a reputable lab would knowingly assist someone to circumvent testing for banned substances. And part of the bribe was probably for the lab to keep quiet about what was going on. I would think WADA and UCI might be interested in knowing about these kinds of things and just might take some sort of action against those athletes involved. Maybe just watch them closely, test more often; maybe even some sort of ban. Now the question is: was the lab as an entity involved, or was it merely a case where some of the employees were bribed? If the former, then indeed some sanction should be applied to the lab. But if the only wrong done was to correctly analyze the provided samples, then I see no reason to call into doubt any other test results.
Apparently the knowledge Kohl gained here wasn’t so good, since he did get caught.
Going back to the Ortiz story for a moment. WS, steroid use has been against baseball rules since at least 1991. See http://grg51.typepad.com/steroid_nation/2007/06/steroids-in-bas.html. There was not a testing program in place, and it’s not clear what the penalties would have been if anyone had been caught back then, but using steroids was against the rules when Ortiz and the others were tested in 2003.
Interesting, though, that no one talks about this. In the court of public opinion, it doesn’t much matter WHAT the rules were. All that matters is that someone says that you tested positive.
WS, I may be biased, but the talk is that the BoSox are getting off light on the doping stuff, compared to the Yankees and other teams. See for example http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/2009/08/11/2009-08-11_david_ortiz.html. The Yankees and Mets were the teams focused on most closely in the Mitchell Report, and the Yankees were the first team to have a number of prominent players accused of doping (Clemens, Pettite, A-Rod). The Sox have been baseball’s most successful team this decade, and Ortiz and Ramirez led them to two championships. It would be hard NOT to comment on them. But as for what has led to the disclosure of some names and not of others … there’s no way to know at this point.
8-0, Ortiz will not be bankrupted by this situation. Landis will probably prove to be the more tragic figure. I don’t think that blunts any of the things I’ve said above.
Thanks for the correction, Larry. I thought I had read that somewhere but I may be confusing steroids and human growth hormone. As you might recall, there was a bit of a flap after Rick Ankiel came back to the Cardinals, having converted from a pitcher to outfielder, when it was revealed that he had purchased HGH. But apparently, at the time he did, HGH was not banned in MLB.
I was only speculating about the NY/Boston rivalry being behind these revelations. I am probably biased too, but basically I figure a pox on both your houses, being an NL guy. What is troubling to me is that results of tests which were supposed to be confidential are being released, and on a piece by piece basis. The purpose of the tests was supposed to be to just determine the nature and extent of the doping problem in MLB. NOw think to the future: how cooperative will players, and their union, be if there are proposals to do similar testing, say to analyze how effective anti-doping efforts have been?
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/08/26/steroids.ruling/index.html