Forums >Racing>Pistorius: a hero, yes, but not an Olympian - Mick Hume
I've got a fever...
He's proven that there is no advantage in a court of law yet you all question it.
OJ was found not guilty in a court of law.
On your deathbed, you won't wish that you'd spent more time at the office. But you will wish that you'd spent more time running. Because if you had, you wouldn't be on your deathbed.
calf skin =/= carbon fiber.
"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/
Options,Account, Forums
I say Pistorius could take OJ.
It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.
I think it's about time that the authorities stepped in and levelled this playing field
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_versus_Horse_Marathon
By (a) removing a leg from the horses, and (b) allowing the men to use an extra leg.
I don't know. Even in sports where one side has an 'unfair' advantage you can still have a competition. Pistorius has exerted a lot of legal energy to prove to the IAAF that he is no better than anyone else, but on the day he's going to want to dispense with all that and use everything within his control to thoroughly trounce the opposition, and therefore prove otherwise. He'll just have to be careful he doesn't undermine his own case for inclusion (unlike your 'ordinary' athlete).
His advantages and disadvantages certainly make him an outlier in the field but when the gun goes off they will all be racing for the same thing, which for 40-odd seconds kind of makes him equal-ish. And which athlete is not going to race him just because he's in a different category?
I know it feels like a slippery slope and that pretty soon we'll have athletes lining up in...something servo-assisted...but where the slippery slope starts and ends is always arbitrary and depends on the balance of opinion. Couldn't it end here?
Never been to the Americas, but how many of you guys have ever been to Derby?
... Couldn't it end here?
Where is "here" ?
(It sounds like you mean allow Pistorius as a special case and not allow anyone else - but I'm guessing that I'm misunderstanding you.)
Pistorious really has no mechanical advantage. the human foot has way better shock absorbtion and energy return than any carbon foot. I fit people for prosthetics. what people fail to realise is how these carbon cheetah feet are held on. they are held on with non breathable silicone suspension sleeves. try running with silicon socks on your feet. lots of blisters and pools of sweat in there. that is what it is like inside each of those sockets. each step he has no sensory feeling of the ground, unlike a natural foot..
Oscar Pistorious was born with a congenital deformity (born without fibulas) and had amputation surgery at 11months old so he has had his entire life to adapt and adjust to running. he hasn't known what it is like to have feet.
It can take an adult a LONG time just to learn how to WALK with a prosthesis, let alone run. yes, some people do pick it up quicker, but it still takes a lot of muscle re-training. Going from having feet and being able to feel the ground and how hard to push off to not being able to feel the ground and balance is very difficult.
-In other words athletes wont be chopping their legs off any time soon for a mechanical advantage.
KC born 7-14-13. RC born 7-21-15
Old PR's: 5k 19:36, 10mi 1:07:46, HM 1:30:04, M 3:06:19
Working on a Comeback after baby #2
By "here" I meant wherever we are on the slippery slope. There is no automatic reason we must slide all the way to the bottom. We could - if we really wanted - deal with each athlete on a case by case basis.
Sure, sometimes its harder to defend a position when you've already conceded something in principle, but what principles have been conceded? OK - Pistorius has access to technology that not everyone has the ability to use. That's an 'unfair' advantage that has been allowed. But aren't all advantages basically unfair? Despite significant similarities (and over 400m Pistorius's times are similar to those of the other competitors) no two athletes will be exactly the same on the start line. That's an inherent unfairness that lasts until the starter's pistol fires. But from that moment on, until the finish line, luck and judgement come into play and become major factors in the race.
If Pistorius's times start to show that he is not in the same league as those he is competing against, then I'm pretty sure the natural reaction of the IAAF will be to exclude him from future events. OK - not "pretty sure", but that's what I'd like to expect. Slightly naive but there you go. This means that the problems are all on Pistorius's side: unlike legs-intact athletes he cannot aim for continuous improvement and welcome it when he achieves it. The first reaction to his ever breaking a WR would undoubtedly be a lengthy court case, not a party. In fact, he's caught in a Catch-22 situation: he can only prove that he's worthy of running in the Olympics by aiming to *not* run consistently faster than everyone else.
For now, provided his blades don't prove a hazard in the relay changeover area, it looks like he will give the rest of the athletes a good run for their money. I think I can live with his inclusion, without believing that we are consequently destined to slip further down the slope.
I mean if we had 20 double amputees that were running at world record pace there might be an argument. But clearly that doesn't seem to be the case.
If I was going to be hobbled by being forced to use my healthy, normal legs to run, I should have been informed. Damn it.
I have poor vision. I wear contacts. These are aritifical enhancements which aid my running. Aid my running in simply preventing me from tripping or crashing into people. We've accepted that this is allowed because my skill in this area is at best, only at some obvious societal norm. I can see maybe 20/20 at best.
But I can't believe people cannot see how rediculous it sounds to have people using artificial legs in a running contest. I'm sorry if that sounds cruel. But I don't think Pistorius wants to be in based on anyone's pity. He wants to be in because he's able to race on even terms.
You can argue that contacts and carbon fiber blades are the same thing. But how on earth can anyone say that his blades and most people's legs are equivalent. It's impossible. And obviously most importantly in this comparison, vision is a minor issue in running which only prevents something bad from happening. It doesn't make me faster.
Now if I was entering a vision contest then perhaps contacts should be banned. Because it would be hard to say at what point contacts aid beyond some accepted norm. On some level contacts can be perhaps made to make my vision better in a vision contest where I'm now beyond some normal level of eyesight. It would be like... I don't know... allowing artifical legs in a running contest.
#artbydmcbride
I think we've watched too much science fiction, and episodes of the Iron Man. Just because they are artificial legs they don't give him super hero powers. Our technology isn't that good, and may never be. I believe he is just that remarkable enough an athlete to overcome their disadvantages. And he is an outlier unlikely to be repeated.
Runners run
I have poor vision. I wear contacts. These are aritifical enhancements which aid my running. Aid my running in simply preventing me from tripping or crashing into people. We've accepted that this is allowed because my skill in this area is at best, only at some obvious societal norm. I can see maybe 20/20 at best. But I can't believe people cannot see how rediculous it sounds to have people using artificial legs in a running contest. I'm sorry if that sounds cruel. But I don't think Pistorius wants to be in based on anyone's pity. He wants to be in because he's able to race on even terms. You can argue that contacts and carbon fiber blades are the same thing. But how on earth can anyone say that his blades and most people's legs are equivalent. It's impossible. And obviously most importantly in this comparison, vision is a minor issue in running which only prevents something bad from happening. It doesn't make me faster. Now if I was entering a vision contest then perhaps contacts should be banned. Because it would be hard to say at what point contacts aid beyond some accepted norm. On some level contacts can be perhaps made to make my vision better in a vision contest where I'm now beyond some normal level of eyesight. It would be like... I don't know... allowing artifical legs in a running contest.
Interesting point.
Tiger Woods (and other golfers too) have corrective eye surgery so their vision is 20/15 or higher (better than 20/20).
Cheating?
having contacts will not effect your VO2max, how your body utilizes feul, how strong your muscles are, influence heart rate.
having prosthetic legs will not effect VO2 max, how the body utilizes fuel...ect.
If they did a VO2 max test on oscar and found he had normal joe blow stats, then sure, the legs could be questioned as to why someone with his stats is running so fast.
He is a strong athlete,the power in his quads and hamstrings has got to be off the chart. Energy expenditure can increase by 10% or more with unilateral transtibial amputee. bilateral would be more. I am pretty sure a VO2 max test would reveal just how good of an athlete he is. Gold medalist? no. but talented athlete, yes, olympic potential yes.
prosthetic legs, contacts.... will not influence how efficiently the body transports oxygen.
Yes, I am biased on the subject...
So one advantage Oscar may have... I wish I could relocate the source... think I heard it from the guy who made oscars legs, was that he added an inch? I think to the height of his legs. In this instance he would be increasing stride length without adding weight or decreasing speed.
You do realize that what mikeymike pointed out IS (indicative of) a significant advantage, si?