THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

MGL: “A year or two ago, I dismissed the extra HFA as a random blip.  I am 95% certain now that it is real, and due to decreased use of greenies, especially in day games.”

The HFA in day games has absolutely nothing to do with amphetamines. Greenies are not performance enhancing drugs. How is feeling more alert a tangible advantage? Maybe it is a psychological advantage. But it’s all in your head. Just because you feel better, doesn’t mean that you will perform better. Well, it’s not all your in head, but I don’t see how the physical effects (increased heart rate, decreased appetite) of amphetamines are in any way beneficial to an athlete.

@terpsfan: Have you ever been on amphetamines? They are more certainly a performance enhancing drug. In fact, they’re an absolute dream for anyone who plays baseball. They pick you up when you’re lagging, improve your focus, improve confidence, and help keep the weight off.

And honestly, how can you say that improving alertness and decreasing appetite aren’t performance enhancing to a baseball player, especially considering the relative physical constitution of baseball players from the era?

J-Doug asks: “@terpsfan: Have you ever been on amphetamines?”

Yes, I was given them as a kid for ADD and continued to take them until I graduated high school. In college, I experimented with them and a lot of other drugs. The key word being experimented. Amphetamines certainly did not enhance my athletic performance at all. Perhaps, they helped my academic performance. But they didn’t make me smarter. Amphetamine only help you concentrate better on monotounous mental activities. That is why they are so often prescribed to school children and teenagers. Do you really think that these children/teens have any problems concentrating on activities that they enjoy, like friends, video games, sports, etc… And there is no proof that amphetamines enhance athletic performance of any kind. But if you don’t believe me, ask a medical doctor, or a speed-freak (meth addict) if amphetamines enhance athletic performance? I don’t see how MGL can say that he is 95% sure that amphetamines have caused HFA to increase in day games. If he said he was 25% sure, or 50% sure, then I wouldn’t have called him out. Basically, if you call amphetamines a performance enhancing drug, then you have to classify any mood-altering drug (like anti-depressants, anti-anxiety meds, even marijuana) as a PED, which is absurd.

From a sports medicine article:

“Amphetamines may provide some minor, short-term benefits. Current research shows that 10-30 mg methamphetamine may improve reaction time, and cognitive function, increase the feelings of alertness, decrease a sense of fatigue and increase euphoria. But this also came with a tendency to make more high-risk choices. The researches also stated that at a higher does, they expected subjects to experience agitation, an inability to focus attention on divided attention tasks, inattention, restlessness, motor excitation, increased reaction time, and time distortion, depressed reflexes, poor balance and coordination, and an inability to follow directions. One of the risks of even moderate amphetamine use in an athlete is that due to a distorted perception of pain or fatigue, he may ignore injury warning signs and play even when injured.”

http://sportsmedicine.about.com/od/performanceenhancingdrugs/a/Amphetamines.htm

@29 - I agree defense probably plays a role, too, in multiple ways.  More defense obviously leads to less outs and less runs.  Additionally, a renewed focus on defense leads to offensive performance becoming less valued, and thus your group of hitters will be less good offensively (some good hitters/bad fielders won’t play as much, while some bad hitters/good fielders will start to play more).  Finally, one more factor I’d like to throw out there is the changing role of the DH.  Now that many teams seem to be employing it as a rest day for their regulars, you’ll get less good hitting DH’s out there playing regularly, though it’s not clear to me what effect having regulars rotate through the DH will have on their performance/# of PA’s (and how often their replacements will get PA’s).

@terpsfan101 - I’m not sure why you’re so quick to dismiss greenies as performance enhancers.  Players used them, indicating they at least think greenies help (though players used HGH, too, and the evidence is pretty strong that it doesn’t help in a meaningful way).  Without evidence showing they don’t help (like we have with HGH), it doesn’t seem to me there’s any reason to dismiss the idea.

My own opinion is I believe they help in some way, though I’m not necessarily sure how or how much.  There is some research out there on how sleep/sleep cycles/being tired/time of day affects athletic performance*, and it indicates that these factors do affect how you perform athletically.  Seems to me amphetamines could (and probably do) have an affect from that perspective.

*first link on google to an example of some of this research:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080609071106.htm

@Terpsfan: I’m not exactly sure how MGL gets there either. I have experience with prescription amphetamines myself, as an ADHD sufferer. I never had them when I played baseball, but if I played baseball today I would love to be on them.

When I was in high school I had no trouble keeping my weight down--big appetite, bigger metabolism. Now, as a grad student, I have a bigger appetite and a much slower metabolism. That said, the four things I notice they do for me are helping me keep weight off (although that disappeared quickly), keeping me alert when I was lagging, an inflated sense of confidence, but above all better focus. If I were playing baseball, I’d want all four of those things.

I don’t think anti-depressants fit into the same category as the side effects are the opposite of amphetamines--patients tend to gain weight while on them, and they often cause drowsiness.

@Terpsfan again: If you were to look at the broader research on amphetamines, you’d see that the side effects vary from person to person, largely depending on the level that they are abused and the way the dosage is managed. Also, plenty of those side effects look like performance enhancers. Increased risk acceptance? Lack of concern for personal injury? Sounds performance enhancing to me. Maybe Bobby Abreu should start taking greenies.

"The HFA in day games has absolutely nothing to do with amphetamines. Greenies are not performance enhancing drugs.”

I don’t understand this at all. I’m certainly no expert on PED’s or the effects of amphetamines, but if you are tired don’t amphetamines make you less tired?  Aren’t they the same thing as coffee (caffeine), but to a much larger degree?

If I am playing a day game and I am used to getting up at 11:00 AM and maybe I stayed out half the night, don’t I want to take something to pick me up when I have to arrive at the park at 9:00 AM?

I mean, isn’t this common sense?  Why would players have been popping greenies for 30 years if they didn’t do anything?

If they banned coffee, wouldn’t work production in a lot of jobs decrease?

And what is the difference if they have a psychological or physiological advantage?  Doesn’t advantage mean advantage?

Is there anyone who doesn’t think that being able to take greenies when you are tired not beneficial?

If you asked 100 players whether greenies help them when they are tired, how many of them would you think would say, “Yes?” My over/under would be 95.

It’s not like we really have to do a controlled experiment to test this, is it?  You are tired and don’t really feel like playing baseball with 100% effort.  You take a greenie.  You’re not tired anymore. That is pretty much about it, isn’t it?

I don’t see how feeling tired has any relation to on the field performance. Amphetamies do not cure fatigue. Your mind may feel a little sharper, but your body and muscles are still going to be fatigued, whether you feel it or not.

"I don’t see how feeling tired has any relation to on the field performance”

There’s a wealth of studies on athletic performance and “feeling tired”, I gave a link in comment 32 to an article talking about one study, and it has a whole host of “related articles” talking about similar studies.  Interesting enough, one of the links is to a study that finds HGH can improve athletic performance in some way.  Hmmm, I had never seen that.  Anyways, the conclusion seems pretty strong that something that makes you feel less tired should improve your athletic performance.

@MGL -
“If they banned coffee, wouldn’t work production in a lot of jobs decrease?”

My understanding is actually that no, production would not decrease (at least in most cases).  I believe caffeine dependency actually means people who drink coffee every day need the caffeine just to get to the regular energy levels they’d have if they weren’t dependant on caffeine.  So in a sample size of 1, yes, the coffee improves performance, but over the long term, it generally does not.

B,

I read the study that you linked to. It concluded that extra sleep improves athletic performance. Amphetamines are not a substitute for sleep. Again, I’m not trying to be a contrarian. I have taken stimulant drugs on a daily basis for 15 years now. I have studied the stimulant literature extensively. I lied earlier when I said that I stopped taking them after high school. Well I did stop for a year, but I flunked out of college, and started taking them when I went to a new school. When I resumed taking them I lost nearly 15 pounds (mostly muscle mass), and my diet and excercise regimine remained the same. I am hopelessly addicted to them. I have to take them every single day. I cannot go one day without them. They are powerful and highly addictive drugs. I will probably take them the rest of my life. I can’t deal with the crash that comes when you stop taking them. That crash I feel is due to the stimulants depleting my brains ability to produce dopeamine. I don’t even take that large of a dosage (10 mg of mixed amphetamine salts twice a day). Yet I still get all the nasty side effects. I am 5’6 and weigh only 130 lbs, despite eating a well balanced diet. I have terrible insomnia. I am paranoid and anxious. So my opinion that greenies are not performance enhancing drugs is based on my 15 years taking stimulant drugs and the hundreds of hours I have spent over the years researching their effects.

Again, I don’t know what you mean by “performance enhancing” and you are not adding to the discussion by using that term.

If I am exhausted and can barely lift a bat or run to first base (I am exaggerating of course), wouldn’t anything that makes me less exhausted, whether it is a psychological or physical effect, make me perform better?  I can’t think of many things that are more obvious than that.

Now, if you want to tell me that taking greenies does not make you feel less tired and you can back that up with research or evidence (I don’t really care about your own experiences, with all due respect, at least for the purposes of this discussion), then that is a different story.

And, as I said, why would thousands of players take greenies over the last 30 or 40 years if they didn’t do anything?

Terps, I think you are waging a one-man battle here, which is never a good thing unless you happen to be a cockeyed genius and it is about something we know little about…

You are taking a cockeyed stance on the opposite side of the fence. How much do you really know about amphetamines? Have you ever taken any? Have you extensively studied the literature on stimulant drugs? Again, I assert there is no scientific proof that amphetamines enhance athletic performance. This is a fact. Anecdotal evidence is not a fact. On the other hand, there isn’t any evidence that amphetamines DO NOT enhance athletic performance. Perhaps, both of us can agree that we really don’t know if amphetamines make an athlete perform better.

Maybe thousands of players have taken them over the last 30-40 years. But do we know how often they were taking them? Players are allowed to take stimulant drugs if they have an ADD diagnosis. I think Adam Laroche is one. I’m sure there are even some players out there who fake an ADD diagnosis, just so they can get a prescription for stimulant drugs. I’m curious what your opinion is on this.

Let’s not argue anymore. The whole point of my rant was to get you to consider the possibility that amphetamines did not have as big of an impact on the game as you think they did. Were they a nuiscance? Yes. Am I glad MLB decided to test for them? Yes. Do I think they are dangerous? Definitely. Do I think they make an athlete perform better? I don’t know. Should I have told you about my dependence on stimulant drugs? Definitely not

"Amphetamines do not cure fatigue”

As a prescription amphetamine user, I can tell you that’s just plain, 100% incorrect. If that’s the stance you’re going to be taking in this conversation then I don’t know how to respond.

Also, there are actually several studies that demonstrate the weight loss and energy-boosting effects of amphetamines. When Dexadrine and other Amphetamine salts were first approved by the FDA, that was exactly what the studies found and exactly the use they were prescribed for.

And today, as Amphetamine salts have been prescribed for ADHD relief, there is ample study and evidence supporting the idea that they improve focus. These are ALL performance enhancing benefits. If you want to find studies that support the link between Amphetamines and these benefits just go to the FDA website or the NEJM or JAMA. If you can’t find studies that support these links then you’re just not looking.

Yeah, there are numerous studies that stimulants improve focus and concentration in a controlled academic setting. Please show me a study where stimulants were tested in an athletic setting. Look I am tired of arguing with you guys. Yes, ampehtamines do not cure fatigue, they only mask the symptoms. Just like pain killers don’t cure pain, they only mask the pain for a few hours.

"Yes, ampehtamines do not cure fatigue, they only mask the symptoms.”

And that is not useful for a player who is too tired to play hard baseball?

Let me ask you this:

Do ampehtamines make you stronger, faster, and recover from an injury faster?

terps fan -
You posted these things:
“Again, I assert there is no scientific proof that amphetamines enhance athletic performance. This is a fact.”

and

“Amphetamines may provide some minor, short-term benefits. Current research shows that 10-30 mg methamphetamine may improve reaction time, and cognitive function, increase the feelings of alertness, decrease a sense of fatigue and increase euphoria.”

Amphetamines CLEARLY are PEDs.  they improve reaction time (hitting a baseball), cognitive function, increased alertness, decreased fatigue..

THAT is performance-enhancing.  The drugs are DEMONSTRATED to improve these things (they are indicated as much and regulated accordingly.)

To MGL’s point, they help a player that can’t play due to fatigue play.  Even if it doesn’t make him perform better, it makes him perform more, and counting stats are absolutely a part of performance.

"Do amphetamines make you stronger, faster, and recover from an injury faster?”

Are you serious?  There is no discussing this with you.  It’s like talking to a brick wall.  I’ll let someone else jump in if they want to.

It sounds like terpsfan is defining PED as something that provides only physical benefits, in the terms of making one’s muscles stronger and faster.

But, I think it is safe to say that PED’s definition is broader than that, which is MGL’s point.

If something can provide a substantial boost, both in physical qualities and cognitive ability (temporarily or long-term), then how can it not be considered “performance-enhancing”? And that boost doesn’t have to be from baseline to a higher level. It can be from a lower level (e.g. injury or a sluggish day) back to baseline (or wherever).

And I think that most players who have taken amphetamines would agree to higher-than-normal levels (wherever that ‘normal level’ may be) of concentration, energy, etc.

And please don’t use your own experience as evidence in your argument. Your own experience doesn’t mean anything since you are only one person. And taking amphetamines as a prescription through a long period of time as a kid is much different than taking amphetamines through a baseball season as an adult.

If we can agree that they:

1. Improve focus and concentration and
2. Do not make you stronger, faster, and recover from an injury faster

They can still be performance enhancing.  How much so is the question.  But keep in mind that 90% of this game is half mental.

"Do ampehtamines make you stronger, faster, and recover from an injury faster?”

Based off what you’ve quoted, they would seemingly make an athlete faster (reaction times, not foot speed) and possibly increase injury risk by allowing the mind to overcome the body’s fatigue. After all, fatigue can be your body telling you that it’s time to take it easy for a day or two.

I’m not sure why you’re not accepting the proposed “better focus/not FEELING tired (regardless of whether or not you are) = better performance”. That seems like a mathematical identity to me. If 90% of the game is half mental and you’re taking a pill that improves your mental state, then you have an advantage over players without that pill. Sure none of us can scientifically prove it, but that’s like me saying I can’t prove steroids help performance circa 1998.

I understand why this isn’t actually a cut and dry issue. Amphetamines and even different types and doses can and often do have wildly different effects on different people. Player A might find them distracting while player B finds them to be a godsend.

Lastly, there is a psychological element involved. If a player believes he is mortal without his greenie, then that greenie is helping him perform.

Your question is like asking:

If I have a broken thumb and I can’t swing a bat, but they splint it and I CAN swing a bat, is a splint “performance enhancing?”

Or if I am asleep and I can’t play baseball, but you can pour water on me to wake me up, is water “performance enhancing?”

Come on…

If we can agree that they:

1. Improve focus and concentration and

Just want to say that we shouldn’t have to agree - they are proven to do this.  That’s specifically *why* terpsfan takes them.  It’s not an opinion.

Amphetamines STEROIDS and even different types and doses can and often do have wildly different effects on different people. Player A might find them distracting while player B finds them to be a godsend.

Amphetamines as PEDs is a cut-and-dried issue.

What thread is this split off from?

@TerpsFan: There are very, very good reasons why there are no studies that show how amphetamines, or steroids, or human growth hormone, or human insulin factor improve athletic performance. The main reason is that constructing these studies would be 100% illegal and considerably unethical based on the codes of every medical certification board, government-run or dependent.

The FDA does not approve drugs that improve physical competence except as a remedy for an acknowledged disorder, and prescribing drugs for such studies outside of federal auspices would be patently illegal.

If you don’t consider improved focus, weigh loss, increased energy and increased risk-taking behavior as components of performance in the game of baseball, then I guess nobody can really argue this point with you. But anyone who plays baseball would consider these performance benefits. And unlike other performance enhancers (except cocaine), the effects are immediately noticeable. That’s why they took them in the first place.

"Caffeine is one of the best-tested ergogenic aids (substances, devices, or practices that enhance an individual’s energy use, production, or recovery) and is known to help athletes train harder and longer. Caffeine stimulates the brain and contributes to clearer thinking and greater concentration.

There are more than 74 good studies on the use of caffeine for both endurance exercise and short-term, higher intensity exercise. The vast majority of the studies conclude that caffeine does indeed enhance performance and makes the effort seem easier (by about six percent).”

http://www.active.com/nutrition/Articles/The_facts_about_caffeine_and_athletic_performance.htm

I think JC had a post on caffeine a while back, also.  So if amphetamines do the same things that coffee does, but more....

I guess I don’t see what the big fuss is over greenies since I take them every day. It would be hypocritical for me to say that it is wrong for players to use them to gain an edge.

MGL, all I was asking you was if you thought amphetamines make you stronger, faster, and recover from injury quicker. You didn’t answer this in your “talking to a brick wall” comment.

And nobody has said anything about the ADD exemption. Do you think it is fair that players with an ADD diagnosis are allowed to take amphetamines or other stimulant drugs?

1) what everyone else said: you (tf101) are a brick wall.  mention this thread to your doctor the next time you’re in to see him.  insult us as much as you like.  then ask him in all seriousness whether he thinks you need to change your drug regimen.

2) what Hizouse said.  even a mild stimulant like caffeine is demonstrated broadly to improve athletic performance.  speed does what it does a whole lot better than coffee.  qed, I think.

3) what do you mean, there’s nothing in the literature?  the third google hit for ‘amphetamine sports’ is http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7286248 with this abstract:

“The amphetamines can enhance athletic performance. That much seems clear from the literature, some of which is reviewed here. Increases in endurance have been demonstrated in both humans and rats. Smith and Beecher, 20 years ago, showed improvement of running, swimming, and weight throwing in highly trained athletes. Laboratory analogs of such performances have also been used and similar enhancement demonstrated. The amount of change induced by the amphetamines is usually small, of the order of a few percent. Nevertheless, since a fraction of a percent improvement can make the difference between fame and oblivion, the margin conferred by these drugs can be quite important.”

Quod.

Erat.

Demonstrandum.

MGL: “If you asked 100 players whether greenies help them when they are tired, how many of them would you think would say, “Yes?” My over/under would be 95. “

If you asked 100 players whether HGH helped them, how many would say it did?  95?  More? 

Some players think wearing the same jock without washing it are going to make them play better.  I think it’s safe to say that’s absurd.  Just because someone thinks something doesn’t mean they’re right and just because they believe something doesn’t mean they’ll see any effects.

If a team, or many players on a team, like to use amphetamines and think it helps their performance, would it be difficult for them to get it on the road?  If I were a big-time player, and I needed amphetamines to get from 20 HR/year to 35 HR/year and make gobs more money, I would make sure I got my amphetamines even if my team was on the road.  Sure, I may have trouble getting it on a plane, but let’s face it, $20 million goes a long way to pay a few buddies to follow me from city to city in their car where it wouldn’t be tough to travel with illegal drugs.  Plus there is the added benefit that if they ever got caught (speeding ticket or something), there would be no link to me.

wcw, nobody is insulting anybody here except you. Thanks for the link to the study. This is the kind of information I was asking for. You’re still a troll. Why would my doctor give a shit about my personal views on the drugs I’m being given? I don’t abuse them, use them to get high, or sell them. So what if my INFORMED OPININION doesn’t agree with a doctor’s point of view.

Well said, David#31. We don’t know how much of the percieved benefit is attributable to the placebo effect.

Something that increases wakefulness and focus doesn’t enhance the performance of someone who is tired and having difficulty focusing?

That’s actually not debatable-it’s newsworthy..

If all amphetamines did was increase wakefulness and focus, yes, it would likely help.  But that’s not all it does.  There are negative side effects to consider here too.  terpsfan listed several of them and many of them would make it more difficult for the player to perform.  Cocaine also increases wakefulness, but it causes many other things that would make it very difficult for someone to perform better. 

Many here seem to want to paint this in one way: all the benefits can and or do help while there is apparently nothing that is bad.  If that’s true, then why is it even illegal? 

I don’t know if it helps performance or not and I’ve not read anything that is convincing.  A lot of people here are willing to jump to conclusions that may in fact not be accurate.  Just because someone is more awake or more alert doesn’t mean it makes them perform better.  It just means they are more awake and more alert.  That’s all it means until someone can show it improves performance and nobody has done that yet. 

This reminds me of the whole steroids debate.  They make you stronger and therefore hit for more power.  While that may very likely be true, what’s ignored is the side effects from taking them and how certain injuries become much more likely leading to time on the DL and no performance at all. 

Does taking amphetamines make one person perform better in one situation?  Perhaps.  That even seems likely since we’re all going to react somewhat differently to the same drug, but does it make most people perform better in all situations?  I don’t know the answer to that.

As for HFA having anything to do with fewer greenies, that’s absurd.  Are we saying that players on the road do not take greenies as frequently as those at home or vice versa?  If so, why would anyone think that is true?  An addict, and that’s what these people are, is going to get their drug wherever they are at.  They almost certainly wouldn’t even leave home without taking twice as much of the drug that they’d probably use (just in case they have to share with someone).  If a drug addict takes a vacation, he doesn’t suddenly stop using drugs.  He either takes them with him or he finds them there and they are not at all hard to find.  It would take a drug addict 30 minutes to find his drug of choice in a new city.

"MGL: “If you asked 100 players whether greenies help them when they are tired, how many of them would you think would say, “Yes?” My over/under would be 95.”

I agree with your assessment.

It was more of a throwaway comment.  On the other hand, I’m talking about players who have taken them, not those who haven’t and are just speculating.

“As for HFA having anything to do with fewer greenies, that’s absurd.  Are we saying that players on the road do not take greenies as frequently as those at home or vice versa?  If so, why would anyone think that is true?  An addict, and that’s what these people are, is going to get their drug wherever they are at.  They almost certainly wouldn’t even leave home without taking twice as much of the drug that they’d probably use (just in case they have to share with someone).  If a drug addict takes a vacation, he doesn’t suddenly stop using drugs.  He either takes them with him or he finds them there and they are not at all hard to find.  It would take a drug addict 30 minutes to find his drug of choice in a new city.”

David, you can’t take them anymore, period.  Testing makes it impossible, as far as I know.  From everything I have read, players used to take greenies, moreso on the road, especially in day games, and they don’t anymore.

Since testing, HFA went up considerably, from around 53.5 to 55.5 or thereabouts.  I think it is a good bet that there is a correlation.  I don’t know for sure, but if anyone wants to give me an over/under on future HFA…

And, FWIW, I don’t think terpsfan insulted anyone at all.  Maybe stubborn and a little misguided.  But, rude, no…

I’m not the poster named David, even though my name really is David. David does make some excellent points, especially about the negative side effects, which can include insomnia, weight loss (fat and muscle mass), trembling, chills, anxiety, paranoia. I’m glad somebody finally came along who saw things from the same perspective as me.

MGL, you are still allowed to take stimulant drugs if they are prescribed by a doctor to treat attention deficit disorder or narcolepsy. When MLB began testing for stimulant drugs, approximately 100 players were allowed to take stimulants for medical reasons. That number is around 50 players now as the policy has gotten more strick.

I think all we were really arguing over was the definition of a performance enhancing drug. My definition is much more narrow than most persons who posted in this thread.

I wish I would have been taking Concerta when I was pitching in college. The difference in alertness and narrow focus is night and day.

Not only would it have likely affected my performance but also my coach’s confidence of my mental state (seriousness).

It is most definately a performance enhancer. That said, when you’re exhausted, they’re useless.

We also must admit that the players could of been taking multiple chemicals. Downers to sleep, Uppers to play, etc. Or more precisely, getting into the pattern of using alcohol to sleep and greenies to snap out of the hangover. Once that pattern starts, you’re locked into chemical dependency.

Interesting time of this topic, just yesterday I received a copy of Ball Four as a birthday gift from my dad.

While in college, I worked with a former major league pitcher (reliever for 10+ years and a WS champ). He pitched in the late 70s and through the 80s and he talked openly with me on chronic greenie usage throughout his minor league and major league experience, as well as the widespread usage if the substances by others.

It would not, at all, surprise me to learn of non-ADD athletes seeking a prescription for a competitbe advantage. The stuff works and athletes know it.

Given the slight difference in reaction time of good contact versus “just late” how could something that improves reaction time not be a PED?

Even HGH has been shown to even improve eye sight when the deficit is due to aging around the age of 30. How could better eyesight and improved recovery help a hitter?

I remember (vaguely) one quote from a book or an interview given by player from 60’s and 70’s. It was quoted in one discussion about PEDs several years ago.
I don’t remember exact wording, but that player said that for players of that time greenies weren’t performance enhancers as much as performance enablers. There were times when he wouldn’t be able to get out on the field if he hadn’t taken a couple of greenies.
That would be more in line with visiting team using greenies more and lowering the HFA.
I remember reading in several places that players then used greenies primarily as quick pick-me-ups after hangovers, lost nights and long trips. That was several years ago and I can’t be more precise.

Using amphetamines doesn’t mean you’re an addict. There are thousands of college students using amphetamines irregularly to finish papers or stay up drinking later. They are not addicts, but users who understand the affects, then use them to self-medicate.

When people talk about greenies in baseball, assume that kind of user. Don’t turn it into “but if they are addicts then...” as it’s a non-sequitor. If used ideally they have a performance enhancing effect, then they’re performance enhancing.

That said, I find it virtually impossible that greenies cannot have a performance enhancing effect. And I would think the ideal use is occasional use to combat hangovers, jet lag, and late nights. I would guess that happens more often on the road (away from the family, longer travel). Does that prove anything? No. But I’d hope it helps move the discussion between personal stories and addiction as a premise.

"A lot of people here are willing to jump to conclusions that may in fact not be accurate.  Just because someone is more awake or more alert doesn’t mean it makes them perform better.  It just means they are more awake and more alert.  That’s all it means until someone can show it improves performance and nobody has done that yet.”

There’s an extensive amount of literature on the subject.  It does mean they perform better.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080609071106.htm
http://sportsmedicine.about.com/cs/conditioning/a/aa062800a.htm
http://mdsports.wordpress.com/2007/10/14/peak-athletic-performance-related-to-time-of-day/

Alertness, energy levels, sleep, etc...all factors that impact athletic performance.

As for side effects - most (maybe all?) drugs have side effects.  Steroids, HGH, amphetamines, advil, etc.  Seems to me the side effects are a pretty reasonable thing to use when considering whether something should be illegal/controlled or not, and...well, steroids, amphetamines, HGH - all controlled substances - they can be dangerous and certainly have some potentially bad side effects associated with them, as well as the potential to increase performance in some way.

“It would not, at all, surprise me to learn of non-ADD athletes seeking a prescription for a competitbe advantage.”

Given my own college experiences, I would find this extremely likely.  I know plenty of people who either got a prescription or just got amphetamines from others with prescriptions to use for studying and/or staying up late partying, who did not have ADD.  Given how many people I knew that did this...seems like a good bet to me that athletes would react in the same way.

So...anyways, amphetamines are a PED, I don’t see how they aren’t.  What about them is any different than any other PED?

The last several posters are getting to a point that seemed to be overlooked for much of this thread--usage of greenies as a PED is different than abuse and the effect on ADD persons is different than on non-ADD persons.

Standard baseball usage is much more like college students---wake up, concentrate and stay focused.  Its not that that state is better than a full rest, with good nurishment.  Its that the greenie state is alot better than the hungover, tired, partying with two groupies the night before, state many baseball palyers are in, particularly at day games.

And too many comments exhibit some lack of experience with recreational, non-addictive drug use.  Addicts have a different experience by definition from non-addicts--that difference in experience (on a brain chemical level) makes the addicts’ psychological reporting of the experience not relevant to those with different brain chemistries.

MGL: “David, you can’t take them anymore, period.  Testing makes it impossible, as far as I know.  From everything I have read, players used to take greenies, moreso on the road, especially in day games, and they don’t anymore. “

Amphetamines are highly addictive.  Doezens or hundreds of players didn’t suddenly stop taking them for fear of failing a silly MLB drug test.  These same people didn’t even fear getting arrested so why would anyone believe that they suddenly fear drug testing in the work place?  They are addicts.  Addicts lie.  Addicts say they only use something in certain situations to make the reason for their usage seem better, but addicts are using the drug all the time.  There has never been a group of addicts that quit all of a sudden that I’m aware of.  And certainly not without getting help for their addiction.  Perhaps they stopped taking greenies and switched to pain pills?  That’s possible, but it’s more likely they just take fewer greenies and more pain pills. 

There are 3 possibilities with regards to greenies in baseball.

1. the usage of them was greatly exaggerated
2. they’re still using them
3. they switched to pain meds

I don’t pretend to know which it is.  I imagine if that many people admitted to taking drugs that it was not exaggerated and, in fact, quite a bit worse than they made it sound, but I don’t know that.  All I know is if you’re going to base conclusions on the word of an addict your conclusion is flawed.

"Alertness, energy levels, sleep, etc...all factors that impact athletic performance. “

Except for nervousness, dry mouth, FATIGUE, upset stomach, dizziness, itchy skin, blurry vision, loss of coordination, twitching, jerking, trembling, numbness, fever, headache, impaired speech, irregular heartbeat, rapid breathing and convulsions.  I’m pretty sure not one of those things is going to make a player better.  In fact, I think they would all make them worse. 

That’s what I’m saying here.  People are ignoring the other side effects in favor of the 2 or 3 that support the idea that they increase performance.  I’m not arguing that they don’t.  I do not know one way or the other.  I’m just saying it’s not nearly as simple as people are making it out to be.  That’s especially true when all the side effects listed here are the ones that help.  There are other side effects.  They can’t be ignored just because one or two might make a player better. 

Furthermore, it’s not like these ballplayers are taking one pill each game.  They’re taking many pills, as the players themselves have said.

"Using amphetamines doesn’t mean you’re an addict. There are thousands of college students using amphetamines irregularly to finish papers or stay up drinking later. They are not addicts, but users who understand the affects, then use them to self-medicate. “

If the argument was that they were being used irregularly, addiction doesn’t come into the discussion, but that’s not the argument.  It’s that groups of people are using them regularly.  The stories about the greenies in the past and people grabbing handfuls are not the actions of an occasional user.  Baseball players of the past have led us to believe they used these very frequently, if not every day.  Very few people are going to be able to do that and not become addicts. 

I very much doubt the average ballplayer understands the affects of what he is putting in his body, whether it is HGH, steroids, amphetamines or what have you.

I was in college from 2000-2004.  I used an ephedra-based product, Xenadrine, a couple of times a week for about two years. (I believe this product no longer has ephedra in it, due to regulations).  I was taking physical fitness very seriously at that point in my life, and my workouts on my “Xenadrine days” were phenomenal. I would take it on days when I didn’t feel motivated to go to the gym, and I consciously tried to ration my usage, for a few reasons:

a.) I quickly discovered that I couldn’t use it for cardio workouts, because it made me feel like my heart was going to explode out of my chest.
b.) I had read the health concerns and the publicized Korey Stringer death, and didn’t want to use it “excessively” (in hindsight, my usage was way too big of risk for a recreational athlete anyway. 
c.) I didn’t want to become psychologically dependent upon it in order to get myself to the gym. 

On days I took the X pill, I could lift for two hours straight, even if I was a bit sleep-deprived and sluggish from the day before. I felt like it enabled me to lift seven days a week.

I’m sharing this anecdote because my perception is that this is the type of amphetamine usage that would be advantageous to a Major Leaguer. At the time, I was a workout fanatic, 19-21 years old, 6’2” and 200-210 lbs. I became a better athlete during those years because I was able to workout harder and longer than I would have been able to naturally.

For the few who are arguing that “there’s no established athletic benefit,” consider this: If my amphetamine usage can make me work out harder and longer, then I am a better, stronger athlete the next week/month/year, even on the days I don’t take a pill.

"If the argument was that they were being used irregularly, addiction doesn’t come into the discussion, but that’s not the argument.  It’s that groups of people are using them regularly.  The stories about the greenies in the past and people grabbing handfuls are not the actions of an occasional user.  Baseball players of the past have led us to believe they used these very frequently, if not every day.  Very few people are going to be able to do that and not become addicts.”

I’m sorry. I should have explained better.

I’m sure there are addicts in baseball (just look at history).

However, I don’t think that addicts should be an assumption when discussing whether or not amphetamines are a PED. If there is an “optimal use” that gives a performance advantage then we should be using that as a baseline to judge. Yes, many players will use (or abuse) non-optimally, but as long as some use in a way that produces performance enhancing effects, then the substance is a PED in my mind.

In my university days there were meth addicts, and people who used occasionally to study, write a paper, or whatever. Saying that the occasional users experienced no benefit because the addicts had bad grades makes no logical sense. That is the logic I hear in this discussion, so I want to explain another way to look at it. I hope that clears it up.

Sal, I didn’t bring addiction in to this because I’m wondering whether or not they are a PED.  I don’t know if they are and I couldn’t care less whether they are or are not.  These guys are adults and they can make their own decisions about what they want to put in their bodies.  If it’s illegal then they can pay the consequences for doing so.  In that sense alone, I don’t consider any of these things to be PED’s.  It’s just a method to do something like lifting weights, running or anything else someone does to improve at something.  I don’t know why so much time is being spent on adults taking drugs to perform better when so few care about the people using drugs on the street.  It makes me sad to see drug use in sports get so much media attention while the average addict goes unnoticed and unhelped.

I brought up addiction because mgl said that they all quit using because they had to.  First of all, an addict isn’t going to quit and I know many aren’t addicts, but there are also ways to beat drug tests.  That these drugs have been made illegal in baseball does not even mean their usage is down.  If some nobody with little money or intelligence can beat drug tests, I’m pretty sure a wealthy individual can do it as well.

Anyway, this was about PEDs so I shouldn’t have added my two cents on the issue.  I changed the direction of the thread and I’m sorry for that.  It wasn’t my intention.