THE BOOK cover
The Unwritten Book is Finally Written!
An in-depth analysis of: The sacrifice bunt, batter/pitcher matchups, the intentional base on balls, optimizing a batting lineup, hot and cold streaks, clutch performance, platooning strategies, and much more.
Read Excerpts & Customer Reviews

Buy The Book from Amazon


SABR101 required reading if you enter this site. Check out the Sabermetric Wiki. And interesting baseball books.
MOST RECENT ARTICLES
MAIL : You ask | We say

Advanced


THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

<< Back to main

Saturday, January 28, 2012

Bautista randomly drug tested 16 times?

By Tangotiger, 01:41 PM

This is an interesting story.

So in a sense, if they’re lucky enough to be unlucky, they could be tested numerous times.

According to Major League Baseball, about 1,200 random drug tests are administered during a regular season on the roughly 750 players, with 375 more tests given in the offseason.

If a player is found to have been in violation of the drug policy over a stimulant, he is subjected to six more random tests over the next year. Positive tests for stimulants are not make public.

Unless Bautista was exaggerating, you’d have to think he’d have to be really lucky to hit the drug testing lottery 16 times in the past two seasons. Unless somebody thinks there is a “reasonable or probable cause” or “suspicion” that he might be taking something.

But those additional drug tests are usually conducted based on a player’s sudden change in appearance, or demeanor, or if somebody saw something either in or outside the dressing room, or the player gets into trouble with the law.

Suddenly hitting home runs at a remarkable rate wouldn’t cause a drug test or a player to be specifically targeted, according to a Major League source. However, any player, who has previously failed a test, is subject to increased testing.

The Blue Jays third baseman/outfielder declined to comment on the matter via the team on Thursday but a team source said Bautista was neither upset about his testing nor wished to make an issue out of what was said at the banquet.


#1    pm      (see all posts) 2012/01/28 (Sat) @ 21:03

Couldn’t you use a Bayesian approach to find out if it was just pure luck if he was tested this many times?


#2    J. Cross      (see all posts) 2012/01/28 (Sat) @ 23:28

I just did a little sim of this in MatLab. 

Is this the scenario:

3150 random draws (over two years) and in each one every ticket 1-750 is equally likely to be drawn.

So, players (tickets) would each be expected to be drawn 4.2 times (3150/750) but how often is the ticket that’s drawn the most likely to be drawn?

In my first 10 sims I get:  13, 12, 13, 12, 14, 13, 11, 13, 13 and 12 for the number of tests for the most-tested player.

This seems surprisingly consistent.  The most tested player was tested about 13 times. 

Expanding this to 100 sims, I see that the average number of times the most tested player gets tested is 12.1 (with a standard deviation of 1.14) and the highest number of tests that the most-tested-player received in the 100 sims was 16.


#3    Ian      (see all posts) 2012/01/29 (Sun) @ 16:23

As I understand it, what Bautista said is that he was tested 16 times, not randomly tested 16 times.

The article is not clearly written, but to the best of my understanding it claims every player undergoes mandatory testing twice a year at random times; one of them in spring training and one during the season. Then players face the chance of additional random tests on top of that, which would be the system stated above.

If that is correct, you would need to add 4 to that number, giving you a total count right around Bautista’s 16.


#4    MGL      (see all posts) 2012/01/29 (Sun) @ 18:58

No, the article is very unclear in its use of “random.” Random drug tests usually mean that all players have an equal chance of being tested. That may or may not have been the case with his 16 tests.

I think he (Bautista) said that he was tested 3 times in the prior 2 years. The wording implues 3 times total in the last 2 years, but he could have meant 2 times per year or 4 times in the last 2 years. But, being tested only 3 times total in the last 2 years doesn’t make any sense as the article also says that there is a mandatory 2 tests per year for all players.

Regardless, is there any reason to believe that Bautista was in fact tested exactly 16 times. When quoting numbers like that in a context like that, I know very few people who would not give an incorrect number, for whatever reason. And should we care how many times he was tested?


#5    Tangotiger      (see all posts) 2012/01/29 (Sun) @ 21:59

The implication of many tests is that he failed a stimulant test, which is not reported publicly.


Page 1 of 1 pages


Name (required)
E-Mail (optional; WILL be published)
Website (optional)

<< Back to main


Latest...

COMMENTS

May 25 02:54
Largest demonstration in Canadian history?

May 25 02:38
NFLPA lawsuit against collusion

May 25 01:43
Neal Huntington’s best moves

May 25 00:36
Help needed with sticky issue…

May 24 23:50
Rooting for laundry

May 24 17:04
Firefox, IE, or Chrome?

May 24 12:07
How to beat the shift

May 24 11:11
Incredible story

May 24 09:41
Racial bias in card collecting: not the collectors, but the players on the cards

May 24 08:13
espnW for hockey: CBC’s WhileTheMenWatch.com