Prosthetic-limbed runner disqualified from Olympics

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]

[James Ollier @ Jan 17th 2008 6:36AM]

As if losing his legs wasn't enough dissapointent

[Pc_Madness @ Jan 17th 2008 6:53AM]

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. :)

[Ian Tullie @ Jan 17th 2008 7:39AM]

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.

[Nikkoli @ Jan 17th 2008 9:01AM]

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...

[Pedro @ Jan 17th 2008 9:28AM]

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).

[lettcco @ Jan 17th 2008 9:36AM]

@Ian Tullie:
you just gave me an idea: how about we let him race against Marion Jones to see who is faster?

[kbern @ Jan 17th 2008 10:03AM]

@ Ian Tullie

Speaking of stilts...people have also complained that his prostheses are unnecessarily longer than his former legs, increasing his stride/mechanical advantage.

[Juice @ Jan 17th 2008 10:07AM]

"one stride". That's hilarious.

[Dave @ Jan 17th 2008 10:09AM]

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.

[Tavis Veighey @ Jan 17th 2008 12:00PM]

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.

[Genuis Bartender @ Jan 17th 2008 12:51PM]

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.

[IndiaTech @ Jan 17th 2008 3:20PM]

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?

[Hung @ Jan 17th 2008 6:00PM]

@ 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.

[IndiaTech @ Jan 17th 2008 7:08PM]

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.

[Mark @ Jan 17th 2008 8:56PM]

@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.

[JonnyV @ Jan 18th 2008 5:37PM]

@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.

[abadtooth @ Jan 17th 2008 6:37AM]

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.

[Andir3.0 @ Jan 17th 2008 7:12AM]

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.

[Hawkman @ Jan 17th 2008 7:25AM]

I would totally watch it if it were called Cyborg Sports.

[lonecow12 @ Jan 17th 2008 10:31AM]

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.

[Blackstar @ Jan 17th 2008 5:28PM]

Just goes to show, Cyborgs F'n rock!

[r3loaded @ Jan 17th 2008 6:46AM]

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

[Newnike Shoemodel @ Jan 17th 2008 6:50AM]

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...]

[drakono @ Jan 17th 2008 8:51AM]

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.

[Anthony @ Jan 17th 2008 10:31AM]

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!"

[Anthony @ Jan 17th 2008 10:42AM]

To: drakono - That's a finish line lunge.

[superfresh @ Jan 17th 2008 11:06AM]

Uh, no, there aren't.

[JacquesV @ Jan 17th 2008 7:01AM]

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!

[Genuis Bartender @ Jan 17th 2008 7:55AM]

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.

[Superprime @ Jan 17th 2008 8:07AM]

@Bartender: It does if he cut off his legs :)

[anonymouspimp @ Jan 17th 2008 1:17PM]

ZOMG that statement is "Genuis!"

[JacquesV @ Jan 17th 2008 3:43PM]

ok Genuis Bartender, three slightly more accurate words:

dangerous sex fiend

[Nbcdnzr @ Jan 17th 2008 7:08AM]

It'll be just a matter of time, then the special olympics will be the place where all the world records are broken.

[Tim @ Jan 18th 2008 7:42AM]

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.

[Eddy Alvarez @ Jan 17th 2008 7:12AM]

does this mean that an Aibo or Pleo are 60% more capable of mauling us to death than their biological counterparts?

[Nutsy @ Jan 17th 2008 7:11AM]

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.

[Andir3.0 @ Jan 17th 2008 7:17AM]

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?

[Andrew @ Jan 17th 2008 7:21AM]

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)

[Hawkman @ Jan 17th 2008 7:27AM]

So, science should determine how fast he can run, so he can enter a race? Somehow, I don't see this working...

[jqaard @ Apr 2nd 2008 9:44PM]

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.

[Fruition @ Jan 17th 2008 7:17AM]

"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

[Andrew @ Jan 17th 2008 1:47PM]

The old man said I could take any rug in the house.

[R1cebrner @ Jan 17th 2008 7:17AM]

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

[Generic @ Jan 17th 2008 7:17AM]

No matter who is right, whether it is the IAAF or the athlete, I feel sad for the guy being disqualified.

[A-Deca @ Jan 17th 2008 7:22AM]

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

[Genuis Bartender @ Jan 17th 2008 7:48AM]

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.

[Tom @ Jan 17th 2008 8:56AM]

@ 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.

[rawhead @ Jan 19th 2008 12:47AM]

@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.

[lonecow12 @ Jan 17th 2008 10:37AM]

@ 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.

[Genuis Bartender @ Jan 17th 2008 11:55AM]

@ 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.