HOF voting

[danesei@yahoo.com]

Thank you for the personal attack.
I can't respond in kind because my account would be locked.

How does the following constitute a personal attack?

Each time that someone shows you that Bonds' HR total in 1993 isn't indicative of PEDs, so much as it's a case of statistical variance, you basically say that his choice to sign with SF somehow correlates with PED usage. When asked for some justification for your theory, you simply state Bonds hit 46 HR in 1993. That's it.

If my comment constitutes a personal attack, then I hope it gets deleted, but I don't believe my directing the comment to you (since you're the most vocal and recent to say Bonds used PEDs from 1993) would be uncalled for.

Roady, do you simply ignore when others present data/evidence to you?

The problem with saying Bonds averaged X HRs during his first 7 years, but then jumped to 46 in his 8th year is that it completely ignores variance. By picking 1993 arbitrarily, you ignore statistics.

From 1986-1992, Bonds hit a HR every 20 AB. From 1993-1998, Bonds hit a HR ever 16 AB. From 1999 (when the majority of individuals believe Bonds started using PEDs) through 2007, Bonds hit a HR every 9 AB.

The 25% improvement from his first seven seasons (age 21-27) to his prime and post-prime (age 28-33) seasons in HR rate falls within normal deviation. The spike during his supposed decline years (34-42) of almost 100% improvement in HR rate is clearly the work of outside assistance. Again, the "spike" in 1993 can be explained through variance.