[ArtMonkDrillz]

Originally Posted by Crazyhorse1

It may well be that his steroid use accounted for dozens of HR's but not the 100 he's likely to beat his own record by. Another point to consider. It is generally agreed he hasn't been using for some time now. Why isn't he smaller? Why hasn't his bat slowed down?

I guess one could argue that without the help of steroids the natural aging process could have caught up with him sooner and he'd have only been able to fit a small fraction of the homers that he's hit over the past 5+ seasons.

Personally, I don't think there should be an asterisk put next to his name in the record book because of the era and the fact that it's never been publicly proven that he's actually taken any performance enhancers. If they do put one next to his name they need to put one by any record that Roger Clemens, for example, gets because he's also been implicated in reports in the past. The same can be said for a ton of other players.