Oscar Pistorius, a double-amputee sprinter, has been denied a shot at the Olympics... for being too fast. The runner -- who uses carbon-fiber, prosthetic feet -- was reviewed by the International Association of Athletics Federations (or IAAF), a review which found the combination of man and machine to be too much for its purely human competitors. According to the IAAF report, the "mechanical advantage of the blade in relation to the healthy ankle joint of an able bodied athlete is higher than 30-percent." Additionally, Pistorius uses 25-percent less energy than average runners due to the artificial limbs, therefore giving him an unfair advantage on the track... or so they say. Oscar is expected to appeal the decision, saying a lack of variables explored by the single scientific study calls for deeper investigation into the matter. Our suggestion? Prosthetic legs for all!
[Via
Medgadget]
posted Jan 17th 2008 6:29AM
As if losing his legs wasn't enough dissapointent
Your right!! We should give him a rocket powered wheel chair instead so he can definitely win! Cos giving him stuff that he hasn't earned properly will make him feel better about himself. :)
Or let's give someone enormous stilts so they can do the 100m in one stride and set a world record time of about 1 second... It's not about his condition, it's about competing fairly against other people on an equal basis in the same way that we ban performance-enhancing drugs.
yes, but instead of banning him, they should instead put restrictions on what performance his legs can provide to bring him inline with other runners...
I saw a program about this guy a few months ago, and his times are still far from world class. He would still have to work his ass off just to make it (his personal best was still off most countries olympics qualifying standards), much less would he have any chance of winning.
Still, the point taken by the IAAF is correct. He has advantages when compared to "normal" athletes, therefore should not be allowed to compete. Additional issues that I've read about: he does not generate as much lactic acid (in the end is what makes your body run slower) as there are no muscles below the knee to generate it, and his stride length is also much larger (meaning fewer steps/effort than anyone else).
@Ian Tullie:
you just gave me an idea: how about we let him race against Marion Jones to see who is faster?
@ Ian Tullie
Speaking of stilts...people have also complained that his prostheses are unnecessarily longer than his former legs, increasing his stride/mechanical advantage.
"one stride". That's hilarious.
Much of what Pedro is saying doesn't follow very much. To suggest that someone should be banned just because their gland system is more efficient, or because their stride length is longer (i.e. they're TALLER) is ludicrous. It's a grey area that if reduced to black and white would result in all competing athletes to conform to exact heights & weights, making the racetrack only available to, ahem, a master race. Oh yeah, I went there.
Dave you are missing the point, he does not have a biological advantage, he has a technological advantage! If the Olympics were to allow technological advantages in, than some less reputable countries/doctors/athletes would have "Accidents" to get mechanical upgrades to preform better.
A mechanical upgrade is completely different to someone having a natural/biological advantage.
Tavis, I think you are missing the point. The IAAF has tested the prosthesis separately as a single component; not as an integral part of Pistorius' body. Their analysis does not take into account any of the negative factors involved in having your legs chopped off such as the fact that Pistorius has no calf muscles.
The fact is that these prostheses have existed for a decade and Pistorius is the first to achieve these kinds of performances with them. That is because of his extraordinary athletic ability not because strapping a piece of carbon to your knees is better than having legs!
Experts in the field, such as the manufacturers of the Cheetahs say that it is bio-mechanically impossible for the Cheetahs (which are just curved pieces of carbon) to give Pistorius an advantage. Pistorius is getting this performance out of the blades DESPITE his handicap not because of it.
Hmmmm. Let us see...
Using specially designed track suits and shoes that are tested in wind tunnels. OK
Specially designed suit for Thorpe and Popov that reduces drag. OK (OK This has nothing to do with IAAF)
Special diet designed by world's best nutrition experts. OK
Special tents to simulate low atmospheric pressure. OK
Multi Million $ Training camps in Florida. OK
Steriods. Kinda OK
A double amputee using prostethic legs. DEFINATELY NO NO! Are you kidding me!
Frankly Oscar is a better role model than Marion Jones, Ben Johnson, Carl Lewis, Flandis, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and half of MLB.
I bet Oscar had a better chance if he was an American, Briton or an Aussie. And no this is not an Anti - American rant or something. But how many Western, Chinese and European athletes are "randomly" tested at Olympic or IAAF events?
@ IndiaTech
That is such bullshit that I'm not sure where to start.
(1) Track suits, shoes, diets, camps, etc are available to ALL athletes and promote competition through hard work and determination. It takes a lot of work to afford all that shit. Steroids, not "Kinda OK" but never ok, aren't allowed either, dipshit. If doping were allowed, then it would be available to everyone and thus fair.
(2) Double amputee with prosthetic legs. What kind of message does that send? He may suffer more than the other competitors, but this just promotes people to go to incredulous extremes in order to play around the rules. This is why steroids aren't allowed. Sure, some athletes probably have allergies or atrophied muscles, but they still aren't allowed to compete if they use steroids.
(3) Very few kids look up to Barry Bonds and company and aspire to use steroids.
(4) "How many are 'randomly' test?" All of them. All of them receive a comprehensive evaluation for any performance and health incongruities. If anyone is accused of cheating post-evaluation, a re-evaluation occurs. The IAAF does not discriminate.
I agree that the IAAF's testing should occur on Oscar's terms, so that he agrees that his participation is not valid. But to conclude that the testing is unfair and inherently reprehensible is liken to treating someone better because they have a disability. You should be nice to the less fortunate (as you should be to the equally and more fortunate), not condescending and overbearing.
1. Even though these things are available to all not ALL of them are fortunate to be born in a country where they could afford such items. I am not saying that these guys are not hardworking or talented. But what I am pointing out is some of us get the luxury of an elevator while others have to climb stairs. And yeah, all these facilities are SPONSORED by big corporations. When was the last time a big copporation sponsored an Asian or an African Team? Many Asian and African athletes are within 110% of the best Olympic Times yet are not able to win because of lack or proper gear. If you wanna level the playing field then it should be done without hypocricy.
2. You mean to say kids will now undergo amputation so that they can qualify for Olympics? People who overcome adversities really inspire. Ask Lance Armstrong (Who had Cancer) or Steve Woznaik (Who recovered from a very bad accident).
3. Have you ever been to the AT&T ball park?
4. Jones was stripped of her medals "after" she confessed not because she tested positive. She confessed using drugs during 2000 Olympics. UCI didnt have the guts to strip Landis of his Tour de France victory. In 1988 Carl Lewis tested positive 3 times and yet he went on to win in Seoul.
@Ian Tullie
Wouldn't work. Torque = r * F * sin theta.
Given that it would be aboue 1 to 100 ratio of r, he'd have to apply a godly amount of force to move that.
@IndiaTech
1. Its obvious you don't follow track and field or have ever been part of a track team in High School or College. Expensive track spikes and high performance speed suits improve performances very little. They are mostly about comfort and shave that last little bit off your time. Expensive gear offers little actual advantage. The equipment doesn't make the runner.
2.You said that there are people alive right now that can improve upon the current records by 10%. That is ridiculous. It is improbable to virtually impossible that current track records will ever be bean by that much.
3.Perhaps you should look at the results of past Olympics and other world class events. Africans and Asians make a large portion of the winners. In fact there isn't anyone better than Kenya in the 3k steeplechase right now. Watch them go 123 in Beijing.
4.When EastBay has sales you get a pair of track spikes for as little as 5 dollars. More so, if an athlete proves him or herself to be Olympic caliber, no matter how poor the country is, they will satisfactorily equip them. The stopwatch doesn't lie, and a good time is a good time. Getting discovered might be hard in some countries, but its not like racing in tennis shoes and a tee shirt makes it that much harder.
5.Since when is eating healthy a secret, unfair advantage?
6.Running camps and training centers are overrated. Buy a book about running (or learn from someone else) and it will go over basic training techniques. If you have Olympic potential, even if you train inefficiently, you will still get noticed sooner or later by someone. Most countries have training centers. Who cares who they're sponsored by?
7. Nike, New Balance etc do a lot for Asian and African athletes
8.The zero tolerance doping policy is still a little weak but its getting stronger. It is still light years ahead of any other sports association though.
I don't know what to think of this, I feel sorry for him because of his situation- being an amputee and all, but I guess he does have an advantage.
I suppose if he pushes it far enough, you could have some sort of "Handicap Olympics" (if it doesn't already exist... and no, I'm not talking about the Special Olympics) or a mechanically assisted Olympics, but it would kind of defeat the purpose of the Olympics. You might as well call it Cyborg Sports.
I would totally watch it if it were called Cyborg Sports.
I doubt he wants any of your pity.
And there is the Paralympics for just this type of thing. For people with walking disabilities. I've always theorized as prosthetics and wheelchairs get more and more advanced, the Paralympics will be more entertaining then the regular Olympics.
And in the Ghost in the Shell SAC this is the case as one of the stories involves a world famous athlete from the Paralympics. Of course this is science fiction, but we are in a world now where the "fiction" in science fiction is rapidly vanishing. It's pretty amazing.
Just goes to show, Cyborgs F'n rock!
Poor guy, he can't compete, but I do believe the athletics authority have a valid point. Ah well, at least he can pretend he has the "maximum speed" function of the Crysis nanosuit :P
I don't feel sorry for him. Those legs for SURE give him an unfair advantage over unassisted runners as proven by the myriad tests that were performed.
Make a different competition allowing, say, "static" enhancements like similar curved springs on shoes for non-handicapped runners and see how he competes there.
[there are sufficiently-wacko sportsjunkies out there who, on seeing an enhanced-ability handicapped person running circles around non-handicapped runners, would cut off their legs to get that advantage...]
He must get a significant boost from those blades to be able to run at world class times without using his arms! What a goofy picture.
I don't know how "junkie" you'd have to be, but I believe Chris Rock's quote from years ago is somewhat relevant:
"There ain't a white man in this room who'd trade places with me, and I'm rich!"
To: drakono - That's a finish line lunge.
Uh, no, there aren't.
You guys shouldn't be sorry for old Oscar. I went to school with him (He's from Pretoria, South Africa), and I have three words:
extremely arrogant bastard!
If we excluded every arrogant athlete from international competition, there wouldn't be anyone on the track. Being competitive and being arrogant go hand in hand. Your personal relationship with him has no bearing on his athletic abilities.
@Bartender: It does if he cut off his legs :)
ZOMG that statement is "Genuis!"
ok Genuis Bartender, three slightly more accurate words:
dangerous sex fiend
It'll be just a matter of time, then the special olympics will be the place where all the world records are broken.
No, no.
The Special Olympics are for mentally handicapped people.
The Paralympics are for physically handicapped bad ass motherfuckers^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^ athletes.
So I agree w/ you. But it's not the SO.
does this mean that an Aibo or Pleo are 60% more capable of mauling us to death than their biological counterparts?
Why not design legs that match the average efficiency of athletic ankles? The olympic body shoudlnt be banning im they should be helping him to compete. They should help fund the RnD of such limbs.
Wrong. In no way should the Olympics be helping people to compete either in training or "handicapping" players. The only way it could be fair would to give every country competing the same amount of RnD money and other countries could spend said cash in other ways. How is it fair to the other people on his team if, for instance) 95% of the funds when to his cause?
That's exactly what I was thinking - if the prosthetics mean he runs using 25% less energy, it surely can't be that big a job to move this within acceptable tolerances so that he can compete (though, this will probably be in London '12, rather than Beijing)
So, science should determine how fast he can run, so he can enter a race? Somehow, I don't see this working...
He shouldn't be allowed to compete in the regular Olympics because
when he's on the track with the other athletes, he's not actually
doing the "100-meter dash". He's actually doing the "100-meter
carbon-fiber leg-stub-blade bounce." Even if by the miracles of
modern science they test them down to honest-to-god normal human
specs, without the conventional flesh-and-blood legs his mother gave
him like everyone else has, it wouldn't ever be quite the same, and
it will never be fair.
"I didn't blame anyone for the loss of my legs--some Chinaman took them from me in Korea. But I went out and achieved anyway!"
-Big Lebowski
The old man said I could take any rug in the house.
they have time trials if he is way to fast compared to the others then maybe they have a point. But considering the extra training that he would have had to do maybe he would be faster than everyone else had he have 2 regular legs. but i like the idea of them funding the rnd. cause if you think about it if he is too fast for the regular olympics they wont let him in the special ones either
No matter who is right, whether it is the IAAF or the athlete, I feel sad for the guy being disqualified.
All,
just a couple of quick corrections.
The Special Olympics are events that take place every year (I think), and they are mainly targeted to people with mental disabilities.
The Para-Olympics are held every four years right after the official olympics. The para-olympics are for athletes who have some sort of physical impairment (and sometimes mental). They are considered at par with the normal olympics, so it has happend (altough uncommon) for athletes who compete in the para-olympics to also take part in the official olympics.
That said, my take on the Pistorious situation is the following: aside from whether or not the artificial limbs give him and advantage or not, the spirit of sports should be to put in competition with each other people who have the same skills and conditions.
For this reason, I don't think pistorious should be allowed to take part, even if the libs were not an advantage. He should take part in the para-olympics against other amputees who are in his same condition.
Andrea
Well then all the athletes should have the same length legs and weigh the same and eat the same and have the same lung capacity and the same length of stride and the same lactic acid tolerances.
The IAAF says that he can't compete because he uses less energy to run 200m than other runners. Which other runners? What is the figure they are using? Let's see them publish that figure and then measure runners and disqualify anyone who uses less energy. This is absolutely ridiculous. If everyone came to the track with the same physical characteristics and used the same energy, they would all finish in a dead heat.
@ Bartender:
I think you're missing the point. The man has a 30% mechanical advantage which reduces his necessary power output as per his body weight. Two 130lb men have to output the same amount of effort in order to achieve the same time and speed in the 100m. Pistorious needs to output 25% less energy to achieve the same time as those men - meaning if he could produce the same power as the other runners, he'd be *significantly* faster for the same effort provided. It is an INCREDIBLE advantage where even 5% would make or break the race. Also, he prosthetic legs are most likely lighter than his old ones, which gives him yet another advantage.
It's akin to losing your hands, then replacing them with T1000 prototype models and trying to enter a boxing competition. No ring would let you enter, for incredibly obvious reasons.
@Genius Bartender
"If everyone came to the track with the same physical characteristics and used the same energy, they would all finish in a dead heat."
That's precisely the issue, isn't it? The fact that we're talking about different "mechanical" characteristics, rather than "physical" characteristics? If they let him compete, the Olympics would become like Formula 1; more about advances in mechanics than the body.
@ A-deca
Thank you!! Finally someone with actual intelligence in this matter. It's sickening to see "Highest ranked" next to someone who says: "As if losing his legs wasn't enough dissapointent"
Go feel sorry for your own pathetic lives because chances are you are a lot less accomplished then this guy.
@ Tom
First off, you're taking the IAAF's word for what these things do. These are the same people that initially said the Blades gave Pistorius a significantly longer stride until that was proven to be patently false. The IAAF doesn't want him to compete and they have and will continue to say anything to keep him off the track.
"Pistorious needs to output 25% less energy to achieve the same time as those men - meaning if he could produce the same power as the other runners, he'd be *significantly* faster"
Why do you think he can't produce as much power? Here's a hint for you - when you go for a run, do you ever get sore calves?
Pistorius has far fewer muscles to work with. Independent tests done on the Blades showed that they were not as efficient as the Achilles tendon in converting downward force into forward momentum and that the fact that he had no calf muscles hampered power production.
"It is an INCREDIBLE advantage where even 5% would make or break the race."
The IAAF has now been forced to admit that he doesn't have a longer stride and that he's not faster than anyone else. They've noticed that he tends to struggle with starts and then catch up so they conclude that he uses less energy. It has never been and still is not a criterion for qualification for the Olympics that athletes use a certain amount of energy in a race. Until there is a minimum amount of energy that you must use to run 400m, it is completely unfair to prevent Pistorius from running on those grounds.
"Also, he prosthetic legs are most likely lighter than his old ones, which gives him yet another advantage."
Where do you get that from? Not only are the Blades not lighter but they also have NO MUSCLES in them. So even if they were lighter, they're dead weight unlike your lower legs which PRODUCE energy.
As for being a danger to others, as has been said by others, Pistorius does not represent a danger to anyone. All athletes wander. The thing is it's must more difficult for Pistorius to stay up than it is for others. He manages to do it but it takes concentration and energy.
i did not know that there was a different name for para/special. I thank you for educating me in that matter. I can actually say i learned something today because of you.
thank you again.
Genuis, if the human joint had elastic properties like the prosthetics, you'd have an argument. The human lower leg needs muscles to make up for the kinetic energy lost by the foot colliding with the ground. The prosthetic has significantly lower energy loss due to its elasticity.
Now, these prosthetics would be a disadvantage in a 100m race, since, like you say, he's got less muscles to accelerate with. However, in a long distance race (where acceleration is negligible), he's got less muscles (less oxygen needed), plus the advantage of his prosthetics recovering his kinetic energy as potential energy, his advantage would be insane.
@seoultrain
The human leg does have elastic properties! The human leg is 3 times more efficient at storing energy than the Cheetahs are.
The problem is that with a prosthetic limb you really can't say if it's giving an advantage or not. If you knew how fast they would be without them, what would the point of races be?
If they let him in, they might as well put a a trampoline in front of the high jump too. Freaking cry baby.
I'm thinking about getting metal legs. It's a risky operation, but it'll be worth it.
Seriously though, it's pretty cool that artificial limbs are getting to the point where we can have this discussion. Go technology!
No way, this sucks!
Before you know it, we'll all be on a conveyor belt like in Quake 4 getting our legs chopped off!
The IAAF stated that Pistorius got an advantage from the Blades before they had done any tests whatsoever. They have an agenda here.
Their "research" ignores a whole host of factors such as the extra energy Pistorius uses to balance on those things and to stay in his lane (something he hasn't always managed).
If it's an advantage how come he has yet to run a n Olympic qualifying time? My feeling is that the other runners should go out and have their legs chopped off if they think that gives them an advantage! Honestly, this is pure discrimination.
That weakens the argument further if he can't stay in his lane he's a danger to other competitors and shouldn't be allowed to race.
He doesn't pose any more of a danger to other athletes than able bodied athletes. If you step out of your lane, you're disqualified. Able-bodied athletes have this problem all the time too. It's not like Pistorius goes careening off the track. He sometimes just puts a foot on the line.
If your foot crosses the line, that makes you a danger to the other runners. More evidence against him, kid.
Actually abled bodies runners come out of their lanes all the time... should everyone who ever has be disqualified from ever racing again? Races where people are allowed out of their lane (800 and up) it's not uncommon for people to be spiked, should anyone who ever does that accidentally be bared as well? (I saw a guy go over the railing at an indoor track when he tried to pass on the outside, I also saw a guy who was using overly long spikes get caught on the top of the barrier before the water hazard... sploosh!) This is a non-starter.
The question is basically this: do the legs give him an unfair advantage and how do you test that?
This energy output thing seems a bit of an odd standard because of the following: He's not scoring super high times in races and he's competing over a relatively short distance. Now, the 400 is considered the hardest of the sprints because of the distance, so it's conceivable (assuming he qualified for the Olympics at all) that the lower energy output would mean that he would be fresher through the qualifying heats.
First off....you contradict yourself, Bartender.
You say he must have "disadvantages" in other areas such as balance because he used to have a lot of trouble staying in his lane. Then you say that other olympic runners (who have been training for YEARS) also have this problem. So what the blade runner's "disadvantage"?
Secondly, You ask, "If it's an advantage how come he has yet to run a n Olympic qualifying time?"
That answer is beyond simple:
Because he would be nowhere NEAR an Olympic callibur athlete if he had his natural legs. The blades are the ONLY reason he is attempting to get a shot in the olympics at all. A lot of people that use steroids aren't as fast as athletes in the olympics either. Are you going to say that steroids don't give the user an unfair advantage too?
To say that it is discrimination to disqualify this man is pure rhetoric.
The Olympics are about proving the quality of the natural human body....not the artificial. That is why performances enhancing, artificial substances are not to be used IN the body either.
Yeap, he is 3 seconds outside the qualifying time, so makes no difference really as he obviously has no advantage if he cannot meet the standard required.
So wait, he runs 3 seconds outside Olympic qualifying time? So that's what, 13.5 secs over 100m? I was running that when I was 14! And I'm no Olympic caliber athlete. Epic fail I'm afraid.
"Our suggestion? Prosthetic legs for all!" HILARIOUS!!!!
Your boring what?
I KNOW I WAS LIKE LOL!!!!!!!!!!, LOL
The man unfortunately is a double leg amputee and he is aiming to compete with able-bodied athletes. He runs on these blades whilst his competitors run on their own two legs. No matter what different levels of energy are expended and whatever variables are examined in the blades v legs debate, the competition is flawed.
Athletes will obviously have differing levels of physical efficiency and ability, but for able-bodied athletics competition they should come to the track or field with the same natural physical characteristics/constraints of the human body. After that training and natural ability will determine champions.
It's great progress that he can run to such a good level with these blades but for him to compete with able-bodied athletes is to distort the spirit of competition itself.
I was watching a program on this guy and the investigation by the IAAF. They videotaped him in a race with several traditionally-legged runners using high quality cameras so they could analyze it frame by frame.
What they found was bizarre. The traditionally-legged runners got slower from lap to lap (which was expected) but the amputee sprinter got faster. At the time (of the program) they couldn't really explain it. It looks like they now have.
The way I see it is that, when he starts off, he's not used to the blades, and as he runs more and more, he's used to the blades and how it reacts as he moves/bounces with the blades and gets faster and faster.
Ever worn a knee brace thingy? Like a armband on your knee? If you put one on one knee and walk, the knee will move faster (because the band forces your knee to go straight).
I'm surprised the people couldn't figure it out from what you said on the tv show.
I side with the IAAF on this one. The Olympics are a measure of human to human abilities. If there are advantages (drugs, mechanical enhancements, gosh knows what else), then that gets away from it. I'd like to see some traditions that aren't trampled by "progress".
If athletes are not allowed a 'mechanical advantage' they should all be forced to run in the nude with no trainers...
How in the HELL are clothes and training a "mechanical advantage"? If anything, clothes cause more friction and wind resistance and slow you down!
The only "mechanical" advantage I could see would be that they are wearing shoes. And even that is really stretching it since all runners are wearing them and, as such, any potential advantage is negated.
The point is....this blade runner has access to something the rest of the athletes do not.
That is an uncontrolled variable.
That should be disqualified.
this is why they have paralympics, whats next the guy gets to compete in a marathon where he has no calf muscles to get tired or knees to fatigue. i have done several ironman triathlons and would have loved to have had these fins for legs half way though the race.
Genius Bartender:
I have invented a new, wheeled prosthesis powered by diesel fuel. They have a maximum top speed of 40 mph. It's difficult to control, and hard to breathe at those speeds, plus you have to put up with the carcinogenic fuel, so it should balance out the advantage vs regular legs. Can I use those in a race?
"I have invented a new, wheeled prosthesis powered by diesel fuel."
The Cheetahs aren't powered by anything so your comparison is idiotic. Basic physics tells you that whatever energy he generates from the rebounding of the material must be less than the energy he put into flexing the material. Unlike an organic leg which has muscles in it, all the Cheetahs do is flex. They have been shown to absorb 3 times as much energy as an organic leg, i.e. they are less efficient than an organic leg at converting thigh power into forward movement.
@Bartender
Okay, well *I* have invented an unpowered prosthetic device. It converts energy from the athlete's torso and upper legs into forward moment, just like running does. It uses two wheels and a simple gear to accomplish this. Can I qualify for the Olympics?
Pistorius running times has been slower so far than the top normal athletes, but letting him compete in the Beijing Olympics would be unfair. The thing is, his artificial legs can always be swapped out if in the future, a better design comes along that allows him to run faster. I'd be surprise if Pistorius would refuse to use an improved version of the prosthetics. This will only end like golf, where limits on the equipment will have to be set to prevent players advantages from getting out of control.
If this guy wins (allowed to be in the Olympics), steroids then should be legal.
Stupid cry-baby, thinking because he lost two legs that we all should feel sorry for him and let him do things.
Like those paraplegics who "climbed" Mt. Everest. Freaking the dude was attached to the back of another person who actually climbed the damn Mountain. Might as well have taken a helicopter to the top.
It's not because he's faster. It's because he has a competitive advantage by having a more efficient running system.
thats bullshit. me being a left leg below knee amputee. i know for a fact its harder on us to run. we use more energy to walk that a normal person. so him not having both legs is even harder.
Are you using the same prosthetic that this guy is using? I doubt it. And I'm not saying that amputees have it easier than anybody else when it comes to running. In this particularl instance, the DATA shows that his prosthetic is more efficient than non-prosthetic runners. He is arguing that the data is wrong. But the decision should be made based on data, not on your personal experience.
Anyone notice that his prostheses are like what your character wears in Portal. You know.. the things that are supposed to make you able to handle large falls?
There are actually very similar devices that able-bodied persons can attach to their legs to give them a similar springing action. They haven't been tuned for running---they are more for fun, for jumping and stuff---but if Mr. Pistorius is allowed to use them, anyone should.
IS PISTORIUS GOOD ENOUGH FOR THE OLYMPICS?
Not at the moment. The South African's best time is 46.34 seconds, which puts him a huge three seconds behind Olympic champion Warriner's best.
Pistorius stands fifth in this year's South African rankings with a season's best of 46.56.
The man's name is Pretorius.
The world record was set by Michael Johnson back in 1999, 43.18s. It's just a matter of time before another Baylor guy, Jeremy Wariner, breaks it. I also wouldn't be surprised if LaShawn Merritt is right there in a couple of years. There are quite a few promising American kids that will break out in the next couple years that may be able to go for the record as well. As it is, a bunch of people are under 45s.
This is a complicated issue and while I don't necessarily feel Oscar should be allowed to compete, in this instance I think the IAAF didn't do enough research to make an educated decision. The fact is that for ever advantage he gets from these prosthetics, there are also disadvantages.
They are lighter than his lower legs would have been but they don't have power of their own like muscles (he would've had). In addition, while our lower legs transfer close to 100% energy put into them in order to push themselves off, these prosthetics loose some of that energy.
They also 'cause balance issues, he has to compensate much more than a regular person would and in fact, he stated that he wouldn't be able to do very well in a 100m. dash at all because it takes him too long to get "into the rhythm" as it were - basically he accelerates slower.
Of course one of the biggest advantages is that he only has one set of muscles that get tired, and his prosthetics can theoretically perform for very extended periods of time.
Finally, the fact of the matter is, he's still not even close to world record (I think something like a second away, which is huge for this kinda thing) so whatever advantages his prosthetics gives, obviously they're not that big.
"Finally, the fact of the matter is, he's still not even close to world record (I think something like a second away, which is huge for this kinda thing) so whatever advantages his prosthetics gives, obviously they're not that big."
The IAAF doesn't want their decision to come back and bite them in the ass in the future. When a disabled athlete IS fast enough to make the Olympics using more refined and enhanced prostethics
He isn't being denied for being too fast. He is being denied for the competitive advantage. He just wants attention. Common sense will tell you that he has an advantage. The IAAF's tests and explanations probably left some to be desired, but they just had to somehow prove an obvious point. The ankle joint argument is pretty good though. Regardless, he would probably be better as a middle distance or distance runner though. He's not far from my PRs as a sprinter. He doesn't get the initial burst sprinters get out of the blocks, but he is able to maintain and that is where the advantage is. He doesn't have to work as hard as a normal-bodied athlete. As others have said, he is what the Paralympics are for.
More importantly than the prosthetic debate, why do athletes wear such douche-patterned outfits? It's like the style portion of their brain is clogged with muscle fiber.
Since, bartender has been amply schooled already and has probably scampered off, I'll answer what I think he would have for you.
The blades are still completely powered by the runner. Therefore, a self propelled chair is not even in the same discussion.
My personal thoughts are, however, that no matter what advantages or disadvantages these blades may have, the other runners do not have access to them. That makes them an uncontrolled variable and should not be allowed.
Let's even up the score then. Cut out his eyes so he has a 30% less advantage. Problem solved. We did this to a guy back in Moscow. His cries of pain were incredibly satisfying. I achieved orgasm knowing he died in extreme pain and suffering.
...sexy cyborg ...he's only got the two prosthetics right?
This reminds of a recent article in a climbing magazine where some dipwad stated that amputee and MIT prosthetics reseacher, Hugh Herr, did not have a valid first ascent because he used specially designed feet to squeeze into the crack for purchase.
http://www.climbingwashington.com/features/images/cityparkf1.jpg
Pistorius needs more energy to get going than other runners. Once he's going, he uses more energy to balance than other runners, he has fewer muscles to generate movement with. According to the University of Miami the Blades lose 20% of the energy they absorb, three times the energy lost by an organic leg. Video evidence disproved the IAAF's statement that Pistorius' stride is longer than other runners.
There is a lot more to this than the Engadget article suggests.
The argument can be made like this: Pistorius wasn't a Runner/Sprinter prior to the loss of his limbs. What if a trained athlete had the same thing happen? He/She would have an even bigger advantage because all it would take is some retraining to get used to the prosthetic and have an actual advantage over the rest, I mean come on, he goes from average Joe to within 3 seconds of Olympic qualification all because of the prosthetic.
"The argument can be made like this: Pistorius wasn't a Runner/Sprinter prior to the loss of his limbs."
Oh for God's sake. How many people do you know who were sprinters before they were 6 months old! Read up on the guy's history before you comment. He was BORN with just skin below his knees!
Easy solution:
Let him compete, and offer the exact same advantage to anyone who's willing.
*holding hack-saw at the ready*