12345

Pistorius: a hero, yes, but not an Olympian - Mick Hume (Read 1154 times)

    It's not about who is fast. I never had a chance at the Olympics. The dividing line is between those who care about T&F intrinsically for its own sake and those who care about T&F only insofar as it creates a made-for-tv feel good story once every 4 years.


    just a simple cat

      So if he were constrained to wearing artificial limbs that had only the same rebound as a the best human foot, and handicapped with the weight of male lower legs (Kenyan not Trent's), then it would be okay, if he still ran the Olympic 'A' standard?

       

      I  guess as you get more bodacious, you begin to lose more brain cells, because there is a limit to how much magnificence your body can house

      C-R


        The lines between fair and unfair in sport are vague, and they seem especially vague and arbitrary to those who are not familiar with the sport. But they've been arrived at through long practice and deliberation.

         

        That's an essentially conservative argument. I recognize there are progressive and possibly convincing arguments about "opening up" the sport, but I think that it's important to understand that changing rules and tweaking them to create different competitive procedures will, fundamentally, change the sport and create long term consequences that perhaps those who feel for Pistorius's situation but don't have a lot of familiarity with the culture of competitive t&f have not completely thought through.

         

        This same line of reasoning was used with Casey Martin. It did not fundamentally change the sport, but it did acknowledge the opportunity for a very good athlete with a handicap to compete at the highest level. The issue has not been relevant since then as it was an outlier much as I believe this will be as well.


        "He conquers who endures" - Persius
        "Every workout should have a purpose. Every purpose should link back to achieving a training objective." - Spaniel

        http://ncstake.blogspot.com/

          So if he were constrained to wearing artificial limbs that had only the same rebound as a the best human foot, and handicapped with the weight of male lower legs (Kenyan not Trent's), then it would be okay, if he still ran the Olympic 'A' standard?

           

          Good article that perhaps answers this question and complicates the Pistorius narrative.

            No, but running with carbon fiber blades in place of lower legs seems to be in some cases.  The advantage appears to come from two factors: the energy returned by the carbon fiber limbs, and the reduced mass resulting in a lower cost to run fast.  The advantages are quantifiable and have been studied.

             

            It's a really difficult situation because nobody wants to be against improving access for double amputees but his Cheetah blades are mechanical devices that provide a technical aid (which is supposed to be against the rules.)

             

            Oh? There is at least one study that says it does not give an advantage: http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2009/11/04-02.html

            Live the Adventure. Enjoy the Journey. Be Kind. Have Faith!

              So if he were constrained to wearing artificial limbs that had only the same rebound as a the best human foot, and handicapped with the weight of male lower legs (Kenyan not Trent's), then it would be okay, if he still ran the Olympic 'A' standard?

               

              not in my opinion but my opinion doesn't matter.

               

              why should world class track and field have to try and judge whether artificial legs should be allowed in running events?  do people not realize how rediculous that sounds? 

              In an infinite universe, the one thing sentient life cannot afford to have is a sense of proportion

              http://htwins.net/scale2/scale2.swf?bordercolor=white&fb_source=message

               

               

               

                Oh? There is at least one study that says it does not give an advantage: http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2009/11/04-02.html

                 

                Did you read this article? A bunch of hand waving. Here's a real article.

                  This same line of reasoning was used with Casey Martin. It did not fundamentally change the sport, but it did acknowledge the opportunity for a very good athlete with a handicap to compete at the highest level. The issue has not been relevant since then as it was an outlier much as I believe this will be as well.

                   


                  Casey Martin is a great example of providing a concession to a disabled athlete.

                   

                  I was thinking of some of the other disabled athletes who excelled in their game....

                  1.  Eddie Gaedel (the 3'7" midget who played Major League Baseball as a pinch hitter).  He was there only to make a small strike zone and get a walk, and he was soon banned from the game.  I didn't like that example.

                  2. The one legged wrestler who did well recently in NCAA (don't remember his name or the school though).

                  3.  For the Michigan fans from the late 80's and early 90's, there was Jim Abbot!  Wow!

                  4.  At the Beijing Olympics, there was another disabled South Aftrican athlete who swam with only 1 leg.  She didn't win.  Obviously, she had less drag while she swam (advantage), but had the disadvantage of kicking with only 1 leg.  (by the way, her name was Natalie DuToit).

                  5.  Tom Dempsey (football place kicker with artificial leg).

                  2014 Goals:

                  #1: Do what I can do. <DOING>

                  #2: 365 Hours training <NOPE, INJURED>

                   


                    Casey Martin is a great example of providing a concession to a disabled athlete.

                     

                    I was thinking of some of the other disabled athletes who excelled in their game....

                    1.  Eddie Gaedel (the 3'7" midget who played Major League Baseball as a pinch hitter).  He was there only to make a small strike zone and get a walk, and he was soon banned from the game.  I didn't like that example.

                    2. The one legged wrestler who did well recently in NCAA (don't remember his name or the school though).

                    3.  For the Michigan fans from the late 80's and early 90's, there was Jim Abbot!  Wow!

                    4.  At the Beijing Olympics, there was another disabled South Aftrican athlete who swam with only 1 leg.  She didn't win.  Obviously, she had less drag while she swam (advantage), but had the disadvantage of kicking with only 1 leg.  (by the way, her name was Natalie DuToit).

                    5.  Tom Dempsey (football place kicker with artificial leg).

                     

                    None of these people had artificial enhancements, including Tom Dempsey. They played the sport competed with the body they were born with.

                    C-R



                      Casey Martin is a great example of providing a concession to a disabled athlete.

                       

                       

                       

                      I was using the example of Casey Martin in reference to the concerns that the sport would be fundamentally and forever changed by making an alteration to the time honored and established rules (which it has not). 


                      "He conquers who endures" - Persius
                      "Every workout should have a purpose. Every purpose should link back to achieving a training objective." - Spaniel

                      http://ncstake.blogspot.com/

                        I was using the example of Casey Martin in reference to the concerns that the sport would be fundamentally and forever changed by making an alteration to the time honored and established rules (which it has not). 

                         
                        The PGA didn't want it, but wasn't there legal ruling permitting him to use the cart?  Hardly remember the final ruling other than his name an his story being in the news a few years ago.

                        2014 Goals:

                        #1: Do what I can do. <DOING>

                        #2: 365 Hours training <NOPE, INJURED>

                         

                          3.  For the Michigan fans from the late 80's and early 90's, there was Jim Abbot!  Wow!

                           

                          I watched him a lot.  I never saw anyone conceed anything to him.

                           

                          He proved he could field as well as most pitchers.  So if he didn't get bunted on it wasn't because anyone felt sorry for him. 

                           

                          Dude threw a no-hitter.  Great left arm.  Great determination.  Good pitcher. 

                          In an infinite universe, the one thing sentient life cannot afford to have is a sense of proportion

                          http://htwins.net/scale2/scale2.swf?bordercolor=white&fb_source=message

                           

                           

                           

                          C-R


                             
                            The PGA didn't want it, but wasn't there legal ruling permitting him to use the cart?  Hardly remember the final ruling other than his name an his story being in the news a few years ago.

                             

                            It was the USGA and yes, there was a legal ruling (Supreme Court) that forced the issue. 


                            "He conquers who endures" - Persius
                            "Every workout should have a purpose. Every purpose should link back to achieving a training objective." - Spaniel

                            http://ncstake.blogspot.com/

                              Oh? There is at least one study that says it does not give an advantage: http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2009/11/04-02.html

                               

                              Yeah I know about that one and several others that reach the opposite conclusion.  The fact that that study used single amputees would seem to be an issue but hey.  There is even disagreement among Pistorious' own team of scientists, as the NYT article Jeff linked describes.

                               

                              It is a tricky one.

                              Runners run.

                                I was using the example of Casey Martin in reference to the concerns that the sport would be fundamentally and forever changed by making an alteration to the time honored and established rules (which it has not). 

                                 

                                You really can't see the difference between Martin and Pistorius? Please.

                                12345