Comics I Don’t Understand – This site is now being updated daily at Please change your bookmark if necessary, and notify any web site with a link to the old address.

December 28, 2007

Big Books

Filed under: baseball, Bill Bickel, CIDU, comic strips, comics, humor, Mitchell Report, steroids — Cidu Bill @ 12:02 am


Jim Moore: Visually, it looks like the book “who isn’t on steroids” is BIGGER than the book “who is on steroids”? Then what’s the gag?



  1. Maybe that is the joke? That people are so caught up in the scandal that they’re not interesting in the truth?

    Comment by Cedar — December 28, 2007 @ 2:21 am

  2. Maybe part of the gag is the assertion that the people who claim they’re not on steroids actually are, and that’s why the book is bigger.

    … or maybe size isn’t part of the gag at all, but it’s spoofing the concept of keeping two completely different sets of records according to steroid usage status.

    Comment by brien — December 28, 2007 @ 2:38 am

  3. Notice that the “on steroids” book is shorter and wider… beefier or fatter? The “not on steroids” book is taller and thinner.

    Comment by CAS — December 28, 2007 @ 8:48 am

  4. I’m split.
    Either I’m with #2b, and it’s a joke about keeping separated records – tainted and untainted,
    OR it does have something to do with the book size – pointing out lots of athletes on steroids, but just as many, or more, that are not.

    Comment by BF — December 28, 2007 @ 9:13 am

  5. I don’t think it has anything to do with the size of the books; it’s just the sad situation that someone would write reference books categorized thusly.

    Comment by Powers — December 28, 2007 @ 9:18 am

  6. I think it’s a reference to the Abbot and Costello “Who’s on first?” sketch.

    Comment by simplybob — December 28, 2007 @ 10:59 am

  7. I think 3, CAS, has it. One of the usually mentioned symptoms of adolescent use of anabolic steroids is the premature halt of the lengthening of bones. (which now seems odd since, when I was double-checking, I just found on wikipedia that they’ve been given to children to treat “growth failure”.)

    Comment by Kevin Andresen — December 28, 2007 @ 11:38 am

  8. I think it’s to prove a point that people are more interested in all the scandals than the legitimate players. I mean instead of giving attention to those players who DON’T use steroids, the media loves to give more “fame” to those who are on it.

    Comment by vnpz — December 28, 2007 @ 6:05 pm

  9. Yes, one is tall and thin and the other is short and fat and I believe, after reading the comments, that it’s about how people on / not on steroids look after using them. It seems odd to me that the “not on steroids” book being roughly the same size as the other wouldn’t have a joke based on it, since that implies that half of all players are on steroids! For people to think that 50% is a meaningless number really speaks volumes (heehee) about the joke that this comic purveys!

    Comment by bAT L. — December 29, 2007 @ 2:58 am

  10. My vote is that it’s just bad art.

    Comment by Mike — January 3, 2008 @ 10:29 pm

  11. It’s not the size of either book, it’s just that there are two separate baseball reference books, one for the dopers and one for the nondopers. That’s the gag. #5 was right.

    Comment by frothy — January 7, 2008 @ 3:10 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: