You keep posting that same story, this is at least the 2nd time in the last month, which doesn't connect any of the necessary dots. I don't really want to get into a debate about everything that's wrong with that article and how he connects the "science" dots together, but that whole article is just one person's hypothesis. Some random thoughts from having read it through 3 full times: Certainly a more buoyant core could make the ball travel farther, but how much? Clearly not 33% or we'd be seeing 600 ft HRs like on video games. Why not test cores for all baseball types and not just MLBs? Why not actually set up a controlled experiment where the actual baseballs are hit by a bat at a consistent velocity to measure how far they all travel? What about the other side where players who have used claim to have gained a statistical boost from greater FB velocity or strength? Maybe the whole problem with that "analysis" is that the entire thing is centered around averages instead of spending some time looking at what happened statistically at the extremes? As the extremes move farther apart the average could still be in the middle... The ball may have been juiced, I believe a different manufacturer with a different process likely changed the characteristics of the ball, but that doesn't explain Bonds or Sosa hitting more HRs later into their career or any of the players whom come forward to spill the beans about their increase in production while utilizing PEDs. I'm not willing to dismiss any combination of factors but beating this drum about it all being the baseball is misguided at its best. They have x-rayed and taken apart baseballs to demonstrate the fact that the ball changed. I'm not sure what more you can expect them to do. Again, where PEDs have helped is in keeping players healthier longer. They haven't helped them hit more home runs. If that were the case, then as more and more players took PEDs the power numbers would have gradually gone up over time in MLB. They would not have dramatically jumped in one off season across all of baseball. Here are your extremes: Between 1965 and 1994, 2 guys hit 50 home runs. Between 1995 and 2002 11 did. You're telling me, that in the 25 years that steroids existed, that no one in baseball bothered to start using them until Albert Belle in 1994? I'll never understand the outrage. I'll never understand how "PED" became synonymous with "Steroids" and how come the "Old Guard" in baseball has no qualms about the thousands of players who admitted to taking (the now illegal) amphetamines in the 60's, 70's and 80's, but gosh darn it, if that evil Mark McGwire did it, everyone must be punished, even those who never tested positive, who's names were never associated with it, who just happened to be muscular guys.