Anyone Watching the David Ortiz Statement and Press Conference?

[frankb03]

I agree-again I feel more evidence will come out to damn him if everything he said on Saturday was a lie.
In short, I am not disagreeing with any of you guys-I just want more evidence other than of the circumstantial type, which in my mind is all that exists now-is it so terrible for me or anyone to say "Lets just wait a little bit longer for more evidence before we conclude beyond a shadow of a doubt that he lied about everything he said about his use of steroids."

Again. It's not circumstantial. HE TESTED POSITIVE! What's circumstantial about his positive test?

And again where he got it and what he took is immaterial. He tested positive. I'll agree the PED he took was probably legal in the Dominican Republic. And I'll agree what he did was not against MLB rules at the time. But what he took was a PED. Plain and simple.

[savage1]

WTF are you talking about? He tested positive in 2003. His 2003 season coincides with statistical explosion.

I'm at a loss as to what are you trying to convey? Regardless what he took or where he got it he tested positive in 2003 or are you refuting that test?

That in itself does NOT prove that he used them during all the years 2004-2008 or 2009-that is what I was trying to convey.
This answers post 91 also.

[mavskidd02]

That in itself does NOT prove that he used them during all the years 2004-2008 or 2009-that is what I was trying to convey.
This answers post 91 also.

Actually he used them just that one time. He had a momentary lapse, used them once and never again in his entire career. Get real....

Even if he only used the drugs once he's just as much scum as the rest of them.

[frankb03]

That in itself does NOT prove that he used them during all the years 2004-2008 or 2009-that is what I was trying to convey.
This answers post 91 also.

From post# 4

In essence he said he never took steroids but did take supplements some of which were bought in the US and some of which were bought in the Dominican Republic.
The fact that he purchased some of the supplements in the Domican Republic could be telling because what is permitted to be sold there is probably quite a bit difference with what can be purchased legally in the US.
I would call the whole thing inconclusive.

Then what's inconclusive? He unknowingly ONCE took tainted or spiked supplements that he bought in the DR. He only purchased ONE dose of this supplement. His use was one time and one time only.

[frankb03]

That in itself does NOT prove that he used them during all the years 2004-2008 or 2009-that is what I was trying to convey.
This answers post 91 also.

And Manny? Do you believe he didn't use PEDs from 04-08?

[frankb03]

Manny Ramirez born in the Dominican Republic
David Ortiz born in the Dominican Republic
Born in NY to a Dominican family

Coincidence?

[savage1]

From post# 4



Then what's inconclusive? He unknowingly ONCE took tainted or spiked supplements that he bought in the DR. He only purchased ONE dose of this supplement. His use was one time and one time only.

Dont be like some of the others here and try to put words in my mouth I NEVER said he used them just one time.
That being said, I strongly advise you read post 79 and at least consider there is some merit to it.
I have never seen such a lynch mentality as exists at this forum-can't you guys just a LITTLE bit longer to see if any more evidence comes out before jumping to conclusions!

[mavskidd02]

That in itself does NOT prove that he used them during all the years 2004-2008 or 2009-that is what I was trying to convey.
This answers post 91 also.

Dont be like some of the others here and try to put words in my mouth I NEVER said he used them just one time.
That being said, I strongly advise you read post 79 and at least consider there is some merit to it.
I have never seen such a lynch mentality as exists at this forum-can't you guys just a LITTLE bit longer to see if any more evidence comes out before jumping to conclusions!

Your two posts contradict themselves. He didn't take them in 04-09 but he didn't only take them in '03. I'm lost. He was taking them before '03?? When and did he take the Savage? How many times did he take them? In your opinion?

[savage1]

Your two posts contradict themselves. He didn't take them in 04-09 but he didn't only take them in '03. I'm lost. He was taking them before '03?? When and did he take the Savage? How many times did he take them? In your opinion?

What contradicts what?
I said he tested positive in 2003-does that necessarily mean he continued to use them for five more years for every game? Read and re-read post 79-that alone should make you want to hear more evidence before raking him over the coals and concluding that it is 100% that he used them for all of those subsequent years; be at least a LITTLE open minded at this juncture.

[10DimeBry]

he used there is no doubt in my mind. the guy went from a nobody to a superstar. on top of that his press conference was a joke.

[mavskidd02]

Here is another and interesting and what I perceive as fair assessment from someone of what happened-I think this has as much validity as anything else stated:

I am not sure if I believe him or not(stated by the person who wrote the article regarding the following in response to whether Ortiz is telling the ruth or not and not me questioning whether Ortiz is telling the truth or not).
The argument I hear over and over again from many fans who are convinced that Ortiz' gaudy numbers are the product of systematic PED use is the fact that he went from a nobody on the Twins to a feared power slugger on the Red Sox. The fact is that this can be explained another way. In Tom Verducci's SI piece on Ortiz, written in 2006, he explains that Ortiz deeply resented the way the Twins used him:

"Ortiz had felt stifled in Minnesota, an organization that so emphasizes situa*tional hitting that no Twin has hit 30 home runs in a season since 1987. The 6'4" Ortiz was the square peg who *didn’t fit in the round hole. “They wanted me to stay inside the ball,” Ortiz says, referring to a style in which a lefthanded hitter tries to hit inside pitches to leftfield. “They were teaching that to everyone. That’s why nobody ever hits home runs there. But when you’re young in the big leagues and the coach tells you to do something and you don’t do it and you get negative results, then you’re f-----. They’re going to sit you down.”

The Twins, Ortiz says, so enthusiastically stressed small-ball tactics such as hitting behind runners that “if you moved the runner over from second base [with a groundout], you got high fives in the dugout like you just hit a home run.”

In his first at bat with the Red Sox, while batting cleanup in a spring training game, Ortiz happened to come up with a runner on second base and no outs. “I came in with that little pull, cheap-shot s---,” said Ortiz, explaining his grounder to second base on an outside sinker. “I still had the Minnesota Twins in my system.”

This time there were no high fives waiting for him in the dugout, just manager Grady Little with a word of advice. “Hey,” Little said. “Next time? Bring him in.”

Ortiz smiles at the memory. “I was like, O.K.!” he says. “I had a little more freedom than what I was used to.”

Says Epstein, “We *didn’t know what we were getting. Nobody knew. We just let him be exactly what he is.”

Ortiz, with a mechanical tune-up from hitting coach Ron *Jackson, and freed of the wear and tear of playing in the field, *started turning on inside pitches and closing that hole in his swing on inside fastballs. From June 1, 2003, through June 1, 2006, he slammed 132 home runs, second only to Albert Pujols’s 140 in the majors. He finished fifth, fourth and second in AL MVP balloting in the past three seasons while conjuring up so much late-*inning *magic—he has 13 walk-off hits with the Red Sox, including three in Boston’s 2004 postseason run to a world *championship—that last year the team presented him with a plaque declaring him THE GREATEST CLUTCH HITTER IN THE HISTORY OF THE BOSTON RED SOX."

I am not saying Ortiz was not helped at all by steroids. Assuming that he is telling the truth about how he came to test positive in 2003, the supplement he took, though legally purchased over the counter, probably contained a powerful steroid. But my point is that it is certainly feasible that the dramatic spike his numbers took could be accounted for by the completely different atmosphere and hitting philosophy Ortiz found in Boston. His own growing confidence and maturity as a hitter probably also played a role.

Also in his favor is the fact that he said a long time ago that he took supplements without knowing exactly what was in them. His story at least hangs together.

I am not sure whether or not I believe that after 2003, he never took anything. But the case is certainly not as clear-cut against him as many Yankee fans think.

I'm not reading that.....

Let's settle it this way, you Ortiz only did them in '03 not necessarily 04-09.

I'm not going to believe a man who beyond a shadow of a doubt has already lied twice to TV cameras.

He also took steroids AT LEAST ONCE, and in that fact, he is a cheater, I need not see anything else to make a judgment. He is a liar, he is a cheater. I don't need to know anything else, and your essay above won't disprove what I've watched with my own eyes.

[savage1]

I'm not reading that.....

Let's settle it this way, you Ortiz only did them in '03 not necessarily 04-09.

I'm not going to believe a man who beyond a shadow of a doubt has already lied twice to TV cameras.

He also took steroids AT LEAST ONCE, and in that fact, he is a cheater, I need not see anything else to make a judgment. He is a liar, he is a cheater. I don't need to know anything else, and your essay above won't disprove what I've watched with my own eyes.

Then if you won't at least read and consider what I posted, there is no reason to continue to discuss this.
I never have and never will "rush to judgment" especially when there might be more evidence which will be released which will strenghten or perhaps even weaken the case.
If you have seen enough to convince you that he must have taken steroids for all of the time while on the Red Sox because he tested positive on a yet undisclosed drug in 2003, then so be it-obviously for reasons stated including the article, I feel I want to hear more before I render a verdict in my mind.

[molta02]

savage, you are delusional on this matter. there is no point it arguing any further.

[mavskidd02]

Then if you won't at least read and consider what I posted, there is no reason to continue to discuss this.
I never have and never will "rush to judgment" especially when there might be more evidence which will be released which will strenghten or perhaps even weaken the case.
If you have seen enough to convince you that he must have taken steroids for all of the time while on the Red Sox because he tested positive on a yet undisclosed drug in 2003, then so be it-obviously for reasons stated including the article, I feel I want to hear more before I render a verdict in my mind.

I don't feel like reading War and Peace right now. I know he used PEDs, I know he lied to my face. I've watched it, and unless you know Ortiz on a personal level and can tell me something I haven't heard, than I don't need to read it.

He used a PED, and he lied to my face. That (IMO) makes him a scumbag.

You want to question that rationality of my own opinion? Go ahead, you won't change a thing. I don't like people who think I'm stupid, lie to my face, and then lie again once caught. So fuck David Ortiz, I don't care whether he plays for the Sox, the Yanks or the Braves.

Kids look up to that motherfucker, and he's a liar and a cheater, keep defending him, you look just as stupid as the people who cheer for him when he hits a HR. You've only posted one thing of any merit so far......

"there is no reason to continue to discuss this."

[savage1]

savage, you are delusional on this matter. there is no point it arguing any further.

Speaking of arguing and as as I have said before, you haven't ever responded directly to anything I pointed out to you.
You talk in cliches, generalities and imo you have no arguments at all-you simply parrot back what others say and refuse to examine and consider All of what was said about the matter
Go back and read post 79 and give me some feedback as to what you think of it and why-be specific.