Should Bonds really have gone down in the history book for the home run record?

Question

I think not because they have proven that he has used steroids.

Answer 1

When did they prove it? I hate the guy and he probably did take steroids. But until there is a failed drug test that says otherwise, he deserves it.

Answer 2

If I were to agree with you, I would have to say that no records during this era should go down in the history books. Yet, I do not agree with you. This era will be synonymous with "cheating". However, it is not the minority that is involved with this, it is the majority. If down the road we find out that the majority of pitchers were "enhanced", Bonds' record will not be tainted. It will simply be in an enhanced against an enhanced duel, which the better "enhanced" individual won. Please realize this is not only era, the only sport where individuals have used means to enhance their chances for success. In the 60s, 70s, early 80s, amphetamines were used to give a baseball player an "edge" over his competition. Before non-whites could play baseball in America, those white players had an edge. You can't tell me that the players, managers, and team executives of the time weren't aware that there were some better players in the ***** Leagues, and their exclusion would give the white players an edge. Their exclusion kept the white favorites in place and allowed them to achieve the records they did. Can anyone be sure that if non-white players had always been involved, Babe Ruth would have been the home run king before Hank Aaron? If were going to shine the light on those that did not achieve success fairly, let's shine it on them all.

Answer 3

I think it is unfair to throw all of the steroid heat directly onto Bonds.

Someone on TV put it the best, It is impossible to compare baseball players of such vastly different eras. Babe Ruth is the greatest HR hitter of the early 1900s and the "Dead Ball Era" before 1920, Hank Aaron is the greatest HR hitter of the mid 1900s and Barry Bonds is the greatest HR hitter of the Steroid Era.

Steroids in baseball are just as much Bud Selig's fault as it is Barry Bond's fault.

There are a countless number of pitchers and other players who Bonds played against that were on steroids too. Nobody says we should wipe out the statistics of people who have actually tested positive. People like Guillermo Mota and Clay Henseley are not tormented like Barry.

As someone just said (maybe Andruw Jones) A lot of guys took steroids, but only one has hit 755 Homeruns

Answer 4

For now he deserves the record. He is a complete jacka$$ but it doesn't take away his baseball ability. He's hit 22 home runs this season at the age of 43 without steroids so he deserves some credit.
A Rod will break this record, he just turned 32 and already has 500 homers, so I'm not worried about Bonds holding the record for too long.

Answer 5

Barry was never proven to take steriods ever. So, yes he is already in the history books as the greatest homerun hitter MLB history. There is only speculation that Barry took steriods just like there is only speculation that Roger Clemens took steriods but you never hear anything less than Roger is one the greatest pitchers in history. And for those that say A-Rod will pass him in a few years...... Have you never thought that A-Rod may have took steriods? Steriods have been around a long time and known about since the 70's with the Steelers so to think that it started with Hosea Conseco and ended in 2002 is just not very bright.

Answer 6

I don't think they have proved it as much as he admitted he had taken something that later was determined to be steroids.

Listen, if you don't like Bonds, then you do a disservice to yourself to create questions about him.

That's why there is so much talk, because people that don't like bonds are discussing him hoping to change other people's minds.

It's not going to work.
Accept that he has broken that one-dimensional # and live with it, or do what I do, figure out that the achievement of Hank Aaron hasn't been broken because it's 22% more likely to hit a home run in Bonds era than it was in Aaron's era.

And if you go along with the era (+) calculation, you need to understand that Aaron was never the home run champion to begin with.

Aaron's adjusted home run total (To Bonds' era) is 918, but Ruth's is 1912.

Answer 7

They NEVER proved that he has taken steroids. I dont care much for the guy very much but hes innocent until proven guilty. So yes atleast for now he should go down in the history book as the home run king.

Answer 8

What? Who has "proven" that? Get over it. The record's his. When Babe Ruth played they didn't allow black people to play, I think that's worse than steroids. Also, remember, when Bonds was supposedly taking 'roids it wasn't against baseball rules.

Answer 9

Actually, they haven't proven a thing. The media has kept people talking about it, but has he ever tested positive? NO.
Quit being a "hater." He hit more home runs than anyone in history. A-Rod will break it if he remains healthy.

He should be remembered for being the best baseball player of this current generation and all the facts support it.

Answer 10

Unfortunately yes. He has not failed a drug test, and by now if he was juicing, I am sure he isn't anymore just to be safe.
Without a drug test, the only way would be someone else's word vs his (what it is now). BALCO says he had steroid cream. Bonds claimed it was some other kind of cream. Who rubs cream on them not knowing or asking exactly what it is?
Plus if you look at his bulk from a skinny Pittsburgh Pirates player until now.
Add to it his moodiness and general grumpiness. Yeah he just MIGHT be usiing/have used steroids.
In my opinion he, and the decision makers of MLB have ruined the sport, and it is another reason I will not watch it anymore, and I will never accept Bonds as the HomeRun champ. Hank it will be until someone else who hasn't roided breaks the record.