PDA

View Full Version : Penalties should have been enhanced...


Tragg
06-09-2003, 09:12 AM
the X Rays showed no other corked bats.

If the X Ray had shown that Samme had, say 15 corked bats out of 75, then there would have been a 20% chance (15/75) that Samme accidentally grabbed a corked bat. That's a reasonable proposition.

But when the X Rays show that none of the others are corked, that means that it was just a freak case - out of 75 bats, Samme just happened to grab the one that was plugged. 1/75 is no accident.

The X Rays, WEAKENED Samme's case.

chosk8
06-09-2003, 09:29 AM
Great post. If Sammy is that 'lucky', I'm gonna have him buy my lottery tickets. He knew exactly what he was doing. Like another major leaguer said....If I had a corked bat, I would sure as hell know which one it is.

voodoochile
06-09-2003, 10:36 AM
Originally posted by Tragg
the X Rays showed no other corked bats.

If the X Ray had shown that Samme had, say 15 corked bats out of 75, then there would have been a 20% chance (15/75) that Samme accidentally grabbed a corked bat. That's a reasonable proposition.

But when the X Rays show that none of the others are corked, that means that it was just a freak case - out of 75 bats, Samme just happened to grab the one that was plugged. 1/75 is no accident.

The X Rays, WEAKENED Samme's case.

It's deeper than that. Out of the 76 bats they tested, none were corked, but how many of them were actually in the bat rack during the game? 5? 10?

Let's suppose it is 10. In addition, for the purposes of this post, let's also take ShamME's word for it that he doesn't pay attention to which bat he uses in any given at bat and just grabs whatever bat he happens to grab (yeah, right). Based on the evidence (it was in the rack for this game) and ShamME's statement about pregame HR shows, the corked bat can be assumed to always be in the rack during games. Now, by the laws of chance, that means he used that corked bat 1 out of every 10 at bats for as long as he's had it. That means he's probably gone to the plate over 20 times this year alone with a corked bat. Case closed...

Iguana775
06-09-2003, 11:42 AM
The fact of the matter is that the damn bat should have NEVER been in the dug out during the game! Use it for BP but put it in the club house when the game starts. There is no excuse for having it there except to use it during the game.

cheeses_h_rice
06-09-2003, 11:50 AM
Did anyone happen to catch that idiot Dave Campbell yesterday on ESPN?

He sounded like he was Sham-ME*'s attorney, the way he was saying that the 76 clean bats completely vindicated Sham-ME*'s story, and that it was an honest accident, and besides, doesn't everyone remember that magical 1998 home run race, etc. etc. etc.

Pathetic. I felt like screaming at the screen, "WHAT PART OF 'SAMMY SOSA USED AN ILLEGAL CORKED BAT DURING A REGULAR SEASON GAME DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND?!?"

soxrme
06-09-2003, 12:11 PM
The bat also had a "c" on it. Do all his bats have a "c" on them?

does "c" stand for Sammy or Sosa??? Does he have "s" for sork on some bats??

ode to veeck
06-09-2003, 12:22 PM
c for CHEATER

pearso66
06-09-2003, 06:16 PM
Actually voodoochile as much as I hate to give Sammy any credit, he wouldn't have used the Corked bat every 1 out of 10 times unless of course he threw out the bat he previously used. Every time he went up and just picked any bat it is a 1 out of 10 chance that he picks it. The odds stay the same every time he picks up a bat. But all the same, I still think that he knew very well what bat he was using.

voodoochile
06-09-2003, 08:49 PM
Originally posted by pearso66
Actually voodoochile as much as I hate to give Sammy any credit, he wouldn't have used the Corked bat every 1 out of 10 times unless of course he threw out the bat he previously used. Every time he went up and just picked any bat it is a 1 out of 10 chance that he picks it. The odds stay the same every time he picks up a bat. But all the same, I still think that he knew very well what bat he was using.

The point was that he claimed he picked it by accident. So, that presumes he doesn't care which bat he picks up at any given moment. So, if he kept 10 bats in his bat rack during every game then it would be a 1 in 10 chance he picked it. Based on the 200+ at bats he has had this year, that would lead to 20 purely by chance at bats with an illegal bat, this season alone.

The bat would have been in the bat rack for every game because he admits to using it prior to every game to hit HR's for the fans in BP. All of this also presupposes that he actually keeps 10 bats in his rack every game. If the actual number is only 5 (more likely) than the number of AB's would be much higher.

You are correct that in reality it might be much less than 20 AB's this season, but it also might be much much more if the odds broke weird. 200 samples is a pretty decent sample size. If you flip a coin 200 times, you would probably have pretty close to 100 heads and 100 tails. It would probably not be dead on, but 97% of the time it would be within 2 standard deviations from the norm. The same is true in this case and because of the higher number of outcomes the SD would be much smaller. So the odds are darn good that he would have used the bat at least 15 times and probably no more than 25 (guessing here). Anyone know the SD of 10 things taken one at a time over 200 chances?

However, I agree with you. It wasn't an accident. I was merely taking the opportunity to point out that Sosa's own words incriminate him much worse than any Sox fan ever could...

PaleHoseGeorge
06-09-2003, 09:32 PM
Originally posted by cheeses_h_rice
Did anyone happen to catch that idiot Dave Campbell yesterday on ESPN?

He sounded like he was Sham-ME*'s attorney, the way he was saying that the 76 clean bats completely vindicated Sham-ME*'s story, and that it was an honest accident, and besides, doesn't everyone remember that magical 1998 home run race, etc. etc. etc.

Pathetic. I felt like screaming at the screen, "WHAT PART OF 'SAMMY SOSA USED AN ILLEGAL CORKED BAT DURING A REGULAR SEASON GAME DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND?!?"

It is at times like these that you really see what "sports journalism" is all about. Pathetic describes it well.

fquaye149
06-09-2003, 09:42 PM
Originally posted by pearso66
Actually voodoochile as much as I hate to give Sammy any credit, he wouldn't have used the Corked bat every 1 out of 10 times unless of course he threw out the bat he previously used. Every time he went up and just picked any bat it is a 1 out of 10 chance that he picks it. The odds stay the same every time he picks up a bat. But all the same, I still think that he knew very well what bat he was using.

i think the actual odds that he would have not picked one in all the times he played...assuming the odds any given game were 9 in 10 that he wouldn't pick it are:

let n= number of games he played

n*(9/10)- 9/10 to the n power

to account for the fact that the odds that he pick the legal bats n times in a row be subtracted from the total odds combine from each game that he would pick a legal one.


actually these statistics things are confusing to me...any accountants or math whizzes who can confirm or deny?

Iguana775
06-09-2003, 10:13 PM
Originally posted by fquaye149
i think the actual odds that he would have not picked one in all the times he played...assuming the odds any given game were 9 in 10 that he wouldn't pick it are:

let n= number of games he played

n*(9/10)- 9/10 to the n power

to account for the fact that the odds that he pick the legal bats n times in a row be subtracted from the total odds combine from each game that he would pick a legal one.


actually these statistics things are confusing to me...any accountants or math whizzes who can confirm or deny?

But the fact that it was in the dugout in the first place during the game is bad enough. It should have never come to the 'accident.' If he truely didnt want to use the bat, it should have been in the club house or his car or up his butt (of course, that's where the needle goes)...I dont care....just not on the bat rack. He should be tarred and feathered. lol. Anyone that makes an excuse for this pompus ass, needs their head checked.

Secondly, THIS IS NOT A G'DAMN RACIAL ISSUE!!!! Those saying that it is, is sorely mistaken. If Big Mack was using one, he'd get the same crap.....but he didnt need to use one.

fquaye149
06-09-2003, 10:31 PM
Originally posted by Iguana775
If Big Mack was using one, he'd get the same crap.....but he didnt need to use one.

yeah, steroids were enough for him.

TornLabrum
06-09-2003, 10:43 PM
Originally posted by fquaye149
yeah, steroids were enough for him.

Remember, though, that Sammy came to camp slimmed down from last year (and still is). Maybe he's not as strong as he was less than a year ago.

Besides, I think McGwire admitted to using andro and/or creotine.

34rancher
06-09-2003, 11:13 PM
Originally posted by fquaye149
i think the actual odds that he would have not picked one in all the times he played...assuming the odds any given game were 9 in 10 that he wouldn't pick it are:
actually these statistics things are confusing to me...any accountants or math whizzes who can confirm or deny?
You asked for it
If there is a 9/10 chance that he has a legal bat, then (9/10)^nth power where n is the number of at bats he took would give the odds that he NEVER used a corked bat.
If you want the odds as to him only using it once this year, it would be:
(9/10)^156 * (1/10)^1, which would be .00000000727 chance (out of 1)
The odds that he has not used one based on your theory would be (9/10)^157 * (1/10)^0 or
.00000006547 (out of one).
The odds that he has used it twice OR more are .9999992075. I hope that my geekness has helped. :D:

Iguana775
06-09-2003, 11:22 PM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
Remember, though, that Sammy came to camp slimmed down from last year (and still is). Maybe he's not as strong as he was less than a year ago.

Besides, I think McGwire admitted to using andro and/or creotine.

Who said Mac was using the juice....he was using Andro and creatine.

voodoochile
06-10-2003, 12:08 AM
Originally posted by 34rancher
You asked for it
If there is a 9/10 chance that he has a legal bat, then (9/10)^nth power where n is the number of at bats he took would give the odds that he NEVER used a corked bat.
If you want the odds as to him only using it once this year, it would be:
(9/10)^156 * (1/10)^1, which would be .00000000727 chance (out of 1)
The odds that he has not used one based on your theory would be (9/10)^157 * (1/10)^0 or
.00000006547 (out of one).
The odds that he has used it twice OR more are .9999992075. I hope that my geekness has helped. :D:

'Nuff said...

Of course we already know he used it once this year, so the rest is purely for the peanut galary...

TornLabrum
06-10-2003, 06:05 AM
Originally posted by Iguana775
Who said Mac was using the juice....he was using Andro and creatine.

Isn't that exactly what I said??????

guillen4life13
06-10-2003, 09:50 AM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
Isn't that exactly what I said??????

haha!

Well... creatine is a supplement, not a steroid. Andro, as far as I know, is a steroid.

Iguana775
06-10-2003, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
Isn't that exactly what I said??????

those arent roids.

well, i guess Andro is after all....my bad.

Andro (http://sportsmedicine.about.com/library/weekly/aa062900.htm)

ScottyTheSoxFan
06-10-2003, 01:13 PM
Originally posted by guillen4life13
haha!

Well... creatine is a supplement, not a steroid. Andro, as far as I know, is a steroid.

andro was basically a legal steroid back then. i cant remember if mlb banned it yet, but most pro sports leagues have.

Juan Pizarro
06-10-2003, 03:03 PM
Have been on the road a lot lately and haven't checked in since Sammygate broke, but did anyone mention that at Wrigley the fans NEVER SEE THE CUBS TAKE BATTING PRACTICE?
The gates open 90 minutes before game time, and if you're lucky, you see the visitors' last round in the cage. So no fans would see Sammy hitting with his corked masterpiece. Just more bull from shameless Sammy.