Although the commonly known steroid-era of baseball appears to be over, no one will ever truly know who is cheating and evading their not-so-random drug tests.
In addition to the use of supposedly random drug tests, proof of performance-enhancing drug use can be found through non-analytical evidence. At the Mitchell Report hearings in 2009, the Major League Baseball Players Association (MLBPA) Executive Director Donald Fehr discussed procedures of non-analytical findings that would allow players to be suspended for Human Growth Hormone use based on proof other than a positive result on a drug test. The use of non-analytical evidence has become more prominent in recent years. Ryan Braun's sixty-five game suspension in 2013 "was based upon, in part, his own admission to using performance enhancing substances" (Boss and Brodey). Lance Armstrong was a cheater exposed by non-analytical evidence he provided. In a similar occurrence back in 2009, "Manny Ramirez was triggered by a test that contained traces of a banned substance, although not enough to trigger a positive result" (Boss and Brodey). The MLB's use of non-analytical evidence came from persistent congressional hearings where the MLB was told to strengthen their drug program. This not-so-direct method of dishing out punishments for those supposed cheaters might seem unfair; however, the strict policy shows that the MLBs efforts to purge cheaters from baseball are genuine. If MLB and its fans noticed a problem with performance-enhancing substance use prior to the late nineties, then the use of non-analytical findings may have found many more cheaters that were never caught.
Does the baseball Hall of Fame hold any cheaters? This question is asked because doping has been a constant in sports, not just baseball, since the late nineteenth century. According to Dave Studeman, manager of the online magazine The Hardball Times, "[i]t's well-known that many players took amphetamines without a prescription for several decades before the 1990s" (Strike Out).