Per ESPN: Braun Tests Positive, May Face 50 Game Suspension (Part 2)

[Nottso]

Let us also remain aware of this: Priority One for many involved in testing, much as it is with many low level bureucrats, is to justify their own existence.

[Patrick425]

Nottso[/b]]Let us also remain aware of this: Priority One for many involved in testing, much as it is with many low level bureucrats, is to justify their own existence.

Very true. My first job out of college was as a franchise auditor for a well known national real estate company. My job was to visit regional franchises and make sure that they were adhering to the franchise agreement and properly reporting all of their sales to the regional office. I felt a bit of pressure during each audit to come up with something just to prove that I was actually doing my job.

 

 

[Patrick425]

Looking at the Brewer schedule this morning. If I counted correctly the 51st game of the season is at LA. Assuming the suspension is not overturned...do you think the reigning MVP will be welcomed by the fans there? The next game is at home against Pittsburgh...so here's to hoping for at least one rain out during the first 50 games.

 

Also, he would still be eligible to participate in Spring Training....correct?

[RightFieldCoder]

Would he come back for game 51, or would he need a week or so in the minors to get back up to speed?

[Baldkin]

If I remember correctly, Cameron was allowed 5 games (?) in Nashville before his 25 game suspension was up. I am not sure if the same thing would hold true for Braun, as it would be a PED suspension and not a Stimulant suspension, however.

[TheCrew]

pebadger

 

I agree with everything you are saying, but why couldn't they test a second run of the first sample.

Isn't that exactly what was done? From what I understood, the first sample from Braun was taken and a portion was taken from that and turned up positive, a 2nd lab performed a test on the same initial sample drawn from Braun and that's the one that showed it was synthetic.

 

How could 2 different labs screw up?

[burnzy24]

If I remember correctly, Cameron was allowed 5 games (?) in Nashville before his 25 game suspension was up. I am not sure if the same thing would hold true for Braun, as it would be a PED suspension and not a Stimulant suspension, however.

Remember Manny got a stint in the minors too right before his 1st suspension with the Dodgers was up.

[theavrock]

I don't know if it is two different labs. What happened was they tested the first sample. It came up with a more than 4:1 T to TE ration. This triggered the more extensive testing. They sent it back for gas soemething or other testing and this is when the synthetic T was revealed.

 

Then Braun was notified and he requested a second test. They tested him and the T to TE ratio was in line.

[billyhallfan]

did anyone catch this article? If it was already posted I apologize.

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/a...0&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb

[Patrick425]

did anyone catch this article? If it was already posted I apologize.

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/a...0&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb

Maas Haas first brought up the Katin situation in post 469. In fact he, Katin, was interviewed on MLB network on xmradio on Monday night and they stated something like "this story was pointed out on a brewer fan site". I have seen other references to this particular story and siting Brewerfan as the "origin". Nice work Maas Haas.

 

 

 

 

[Invader3K]

Braun apparently reiterating the "It's B.S." line today, via the Lime Light Twitter account. Seems like he's pretty adamant that he's innocent.

[prophet]

Here's a question for board members. Assuming that the suspension is held up, would you still be a Braun fan when he comes back? This question only applies to people who liked Braun to begin with. If you weren't a fan before, you probably won't be a fan now. I know some people are vehemently opposed to steroids and PED's and I was just wondering, since Braun is one of our own, would you still cheer for him?

 

I will still be a fan and cheer as much as I always have. I've never really cared if any player, let alone our own, were using PED's, and I never let that influence my fandom. I usually look at the person as a whole, and Braun seems like a good guy, and is obviously a remarkable talent. I don't think using a steroid makes you a bad person, and I don't think they hurt anyone any more than tobacco, beer, or fatty foods. I've never read the Mitchel report, and I've never been part of the witch hunt. I don't believe they should be kept out of the HOF either. I do believe that PED users should be suspended, and serve their suspension, because that's the consequences for violating the rules. But, once they serve their fifty games, I don't look at them any differently.

 

But, that's my view and I know many people, if not most people, are going to think completely different about the situation. But, that's what this board is for. Discussion is great and disagreement is even better. I was just curious what others thought, and whether or not you will remain a Braun fan after this is all over. Once again, if you weren't a Braun fan to begin with, not sure if the question really applies to you. But, you could insert your favorite player in for Braun and ask yourself how you would feel if they were in this situation.

[jjfanec]

Prophet it is a good question I have been asking myself. If he is guilty I will still cheer for him because he is a Brewer. If his numbers stay consistent over time I will probably be able to root for him in the same way pre-incident. If his numbers drop-off then it will be harder because I will feel like his career numbers are inflated with steroids. I am a big Braun fan and hope he is innocent but I will still cheer for him as a Brewer

[jazzytrav]

Innocent until proven guilty.

 

That's how the justice system works in our country. It means nothing to MLB or public opinion.

[jeffy]

Here's a question for board members. Assuming that the suspension is held up, would you still be a Braun fan when he comes back?

 

Yes, I more or less share your opinions on this. I'm not horrified by the fact (if it is fact) that Braun may have been using whatever it was that boosted is T/E ratio. I tend to believe the stories from the Balco guy that the use of creams, gels, patches, etc. is pretty prevalent and that a lot of the testing is more of an IQ test.

[pebadger]

pebadger

 

I agree with everything you are saying, but why couldn't they test a second run of the first sample.

Isn't that exactly what was done? From what I understood, the first sample from Braun was taken and a portion was taken from that and turned up positive, a 2nd lab performed a test on the same initial sample drawn from Braun and that's the one that showed it was synthetic.

 

How could 2 different labs screw up?

There are two tests involved here. The first test is a T/E ratio test. This test is comparatively simple. That said, a T/E test result is not all that useful if you want to use it as evidence that someone has violated the drug policy.

First, simple as it is, it can still be screwed up. In the famous Flyod Landis case, Landis' original failed test was a failed T/E test. It was subsequently shown that the lab seriously butchered the test. The panel that "convicted" him said so in their report and simply ignored that test result in their findings.

Second, T/E ratios can be all over the place for all sorts of reasons. The T/E ratio test gives you no insight into WHY you got the result you did.

What a T/E test is very good for is serving as a sort of tripwire or filter. If you fail the T/E test, you get looked at using the more expensive/detailed/useful GC-C-IRMS (gas chromatography - combustion - isotope ratio mass spectrometry) testing process. This is also called CIR (carbon isotope ratio) testing.

My read on the situation is that one lab performed the T/E test, got a result and then sent the whole works to the WADA lab in Montreal where the more extensive CIR testing was done. (This transfer from one lab to another is one point at which chain-of-custody issues can arise).

The protocol for doing the CIR testing is to do a first run with the subject's "A" sample, which is basically half of the total sample that was submitted by the subject for testing. If the test is declared "postive", a second run of the test can be run using the other half of the original sample. That half is called the "B" sample. In most cases, the athlete is notified that he has tested positive after the "A" sample testing. Testing of the "B" sample is usually delayed until requested by the subject. Often the subject may elect to have a representative present to observe the "B" sample test.

The GC portion of the test is used to identify the substance which it is believed caused the high T/E reading. The IRMS portion of the testing is used to determine whether that substance is produced by the subject's body or is "artificial".

If the "A" and "B" results disagree, the whole case usually goes away. If the results are both "positive" the case against the subject will proceed.

The place where a lab can get it wrong is this:

Good labs are usually very good at performing exactly the prescribed procedure for a given test, and at documenting their adherence to that procedure along the way. In this way, anyone checking their work after the fact can verify that the work was done in accordance with the proper procedures. If you do the same test the same way to the same sample on seperate occasions, you should get the same results. This notion of reproducability is one of the foundations of modern science. The problem is, simple reproducability of data does not correlate perfectly with a foolproof conclusion as to what that data means.

If I run the same test twice and a black box tells me that the result is positive, that positive is only as good as the assmptions behind it. If the criteria for declaring a result positive are not rigorous, what does the positive really mean? If the software that crunches the numbers in the black box has an intermittent "bug" in it that is not apparent, what does the result really mean? If the detectors feeding information to the software are calibrated on poor assumptions, or are not working at peak condition, what does the positive mean?

The bottom line is that even when all the people involved are working in good faith to produce a fair and accurate result, there is a whole lot that can go wrong, and it can go wrong without anyone knowing that it went wrong.

This is why, sometimes, accused athletes want to try to have things re-tested a a different lab. It's not that they think the first lab is in on some frame-up. They want to see if a second lab, which is presumably doing a given test the same way as the first lab, will yield the same result. If the results do match, then the athlete has a bigger problem, as the idea that the test data itself is wrong is pretty much out the window.

At that point, if the athlete wants to continue fighting the test result itself, he has to somehow show that the sample itself is somehow different than a "normal" positive sample, and that the difference is causing a false positive. He might argue it is different because the athlete's body works differently (due to a medical condition, for example) than the "standard" body to the extent that the test is "fooled" into misidentifying what it is looking at. He might argue that the testers missed something crucial in the sample itself that caused the test to be "fooled". Obviously these are extraordinarily difficult arguments to make, and almost never successful.

From people who think in a legal frame of reference there is another interesting point to be made: sometimes, as in the Landis case, there ends up being no relationship at all between the T/E result and the result of the CIR testing which ultimately causes the violation. As noted above, the T/E test in the Landis case was so poorly processed that it was indefensible by even the minimal standards the lab has to meet in order to shift the burden of proof to the athlete. Nonetheless, the lab used the result of the badly botched T/E test to justify further investigation using CIR. The CIR test indicated that there was "artificial" T present, but at no point did they ever establish what it was that contributing artificial T to the tested sample.

Indeed, they don't have to. All they have to do is say, "Our machine spit our numbers that say you're a doper and we say we followed the procedures in doing the test. We don't have to prove what you took. We don't have the prove the numbers are right. You have to prove they are wrong. And oh, by the way, we are under no obligation to provide you with anything more in the way of information about your test result than the bare minimum required under the anti-doping code. And we write the rules. Good Luck."

Braun may be "guilty". He may be "innocent". In the bigger picture, the answer to that question is somewhat irrelevant. Given how complicated all this can be from a factual standpoint, ask yourself how fair the procedures to contest one of these accusations seem to you.

[JimH5]

Here's a question for board members. Assuming that the suspension is held up, would you still be a Braun fan when he comes back? This question only applies to people who liked Braun to begin with. If you weren't a fan before, you probably won't be a fan now. I know some people are vehemently opposed to steroids and PED's and I was just wondering, since Braun is one of our own, would you still cheer for him?

 

I will still be a fan and cheer as much as I always have. I've never really cared if any player, let alone our own, were using PED's, and I never let that influence my fandom. I usually look at the person as a whole, and Braun seems like a good guy, and is obviously a remarkable talent. I don't think using a steroid makes you a bad person, and I don't think they hurt anyone any more than tobacco, beer, or fatty foods. I've never read the Mitchel report, and I've never been part of the witch hunt. I don't believe they should be kept out of the HOF either. I do believe that PED users should be suspended, and serve their suspension, because that's the consequences for violating the rules. But, once they serve their fifty games, I don't look at them any differently.

 

But, that's my view and I know many people, if not most people, are going to think completely different about the situation. But, that's what this board is for. Discussion is great and disagreement is even better. I was just curious what others thought, and whether or not you will remain a Braun fan after this is all over. Once again, if you weren't a Braun fan to begin with, not sure if the question really applies to you. But, you could insert your favorite player in for Braun and ask yourself how you would feel if they were in this situation.

 

Time has a way of making us forget certain stuff, so by nature, (absent any other incidents), this will fade. Plus, he'll have chances to make it right, too. I've mentioned this story before, but I was at a signing in New Jersey a few years ago and there were probably 20 guys signing at the time. Gary Sheffield was the nicest one in the whole room. . .taking pictures, making small talk, signing for a pretty low (by comparison to other guys) fee. He stayed extra time to accommodate everyone, and was vastly different than the 19-year-old sulking in Milwaukee. One doesn't erase the other, but I think much more highly of him now than I did before.

 

For Braun, it would really depend on his explanation. What is this "BS" he is speaking of? Was it a tainted supplement? Something he got from a team trainer? A mishandling at the lab? The onus is on him to come up with an explanation to make me want to support him.

 

I don't like people cheating, and I don't like people lying, and I especially don't like people cheating and lying in the jersey of my hometown team--so he has to make it right. Then I'll decide whether to support him again.

 

He can't just serve a suspension, show up on day 51 and pretend that it's over.

[jeffy]

did anyone catch this article? If it was already posted I apologize.

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/a...0&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb

 

...and the difference is: In 2007 in the Minor Leagues, players would submit two urine samples -- marked "A" and "B." Katin was notified that he tested positive for high levels of testosterone, and he said the "B" sample was then tested for synthetic drugs. It came back negative.

[RockCoCougars]

Are we sure that this isn't just Don Money playing an elaborate rib?

 

I'll withhold judgment for now and hope that Braun is exonerated by MLB. That said, even if he is, doubts will always linger. If he's found guilty, I'd have had more respect for him if he had been busted for coke or something. I can't stand cheaters.

[brettac1]

Here's a question for board members. Assuming that the suspension is held up, would you still be a Braun fan when he comes back? This question only applies to people who liked Braun to begin with. If you weren't a fan before, you probably won't be a fan now. I know some people are vehemently opposed to steroids and PED's and I was just wondering, since Braun is one of our own, would you still cheer for him?

 

I will still be a fan and cheer as much as I always have. I've never really cared if any player, let alone our own, were using PED's, and I never let that influence my fandom. I usually look at the person as a whole, and Braun seems like a good guy, and is obviously a remarkable talent. I don't think using a steroid makes you a bad person, and I don't think they hurt anyone any more than tobacco, beer, or fatty foods. I've never read the Mitchel report, and I've never been part of the witch hunt. I don't believe they should be kept out of the HOF either. I do believe that PED users should be suspended, and serve their suspension, because that's the consequences for violating the rules. But, once they serve their fifty games, I don't look at them any differently.

 

But, that's my view and I know many people, if not most people, are going to think completely different about the situation. But, that's what this board is for. Discussion is great and disagreement is even better. I was just curious what others thought, and whether or not you will remain a Braun fan after this is all over. Once again, if you weren't a Braun fan to begin with, not sure if the question really applies to you. But, you could insert your favorite player in for Braun and ask yourself how you would feel if they were in this situation.

I pretty much agree with everything you said.

[Invader3K]

If the stories I'm hearing from a couple different people are true, Braun is completely innocent. I can't say anything more because its something that shouldn't have gotten out to begin with.

[brewtank34]

Prophet it is a good question I have been asking myself. If he is guilty I will still cheer for him because he is a Brewer. If his numbers stay consistent over time I will probably be able to root for him in the same way pre-incident. If his numbers drop-off then it will be harder because I will feel like his career numbers are inflated with steroids. I am a big Braun fan and hope he is innocent but I will still cheer for him as a Brewer

I'm assuming we'll see just how good a hitter Braun is without Prince protecting him. Even with Ramirez protecting him, it's still not Prince Fielder. I'm guessing we'll see some sort of drop off or increased periods of slumps for Braun post Fielder. Does that mean he was using PEDs? Not sure. It could just be that Prince is gone and pitchers don't respect Ramirez the same way.

 

 

[brewtank34]

If the stories I'm hearing from a couple different people are true, Braun is completely innocent. I can't say anything more because its something that shouldn't have gotten out to begin with.

This makes me eagerly and inpatiently happy!!

 

[benji]

pebadger thank you for your time and information. Brings me back to my days of when I worked in a research lab running ELISA tests. I am so far removed from technical part of lab testing now you forget how many different steps and chance for misread there are. Do you know if they split the B sample at all to be able to test at 2 different labs?

[chuckiehacks]

If the stories I'm hearing from a couple different people are true, Braun is completely innocent. I can't say anything more because its something that shouldn't have gotten out to begin with.

I've heard stories about medical conditions and treatment supposedly related to Braun, but if any of those things were true, (A) he would have had to notify MLB in advance of taking the medication and (B) the positive test likely would have been thrown out in the initial meeting between Braun and MLB after the test.