I am sure that everyone has heard of this brave young man and how he has overcome the loss of both legs to become a world class athlete. The question is, in your opinion, should he be allowed to compete against able bodied athletes at major championships and how far down the road would his acceptance as a 'normal' athlete change the complexion of competitive sport ?.
Oscar's prosthetic legs are a superb piece of engineering involving springs and levers and his substitute feet are a pair of blades rather like small skis. The blade feet are much longer than any natural human foot. Oscar has been told that if he is to take part in the 400 metre relay for South Africa at the upcoming world championships, he must take the first leg. (NO puns please about running false legs etc etc) The first leg of a 400m relay is run entirely in the runner's lane, subsequent legs are run in any lane of the athlete's choosing, usually the inside lane. The presumption therefore is that Oscar's blade feet will constitute a hazard to all the other runners. Also, there are suspicions that the construction of his metal and carbon legs will give him a mechanical advantage over other competitors. Incidentally in one race against able bodied runners, Pistorius was disqualified for running outside his lane as the his blades straddled the demarcation lines between lanes. After much discussion, testing and persuasion, the World Athletic organisations look to be on the verge of allowing Oscar to compete at the olympics as an 'able bodied athlete'. Rules are being amended and it could be argued ignored for the sake of one man.
In an era where athletes can be banned for long periods for taking medication for (e.g.) asthma that contains proscribed ingredients, is it just that a man who through misfortune has gained a potential advantage through the medium of tireless artificial legs and spring like feet. Could a new Ben Johnson claim that he needed stimulants to stabilise his mental processes?, should female athletes be allowed to take male hormones to increase their endurance and strength? Has the time come to take down all barriers when it comes to artificial aids and drugs and allow a free for all?, will we soon see athletes in powererd wheelchairs competing in the marathon?, will the Paralympics become redundant and will the Olympics be open to all competitors whatever their physical condition or drug or technology of choice?
Comments
But he should not be able to run against able bodied athletes. Not enough is known on what advantage the blades could give.
Totally agree, AFKA.
Tough one. My understanding is that basically not enough is known about the effects of his blades. It seems that it gives him a potential advantage on the straights but makes his starts slower, it more difficult on the bends and in the wet. How that all stacks up is still being debated BUT from his point of view he can only do his job and let others argue the toss and if the rules allow him to compete then you can only admire and support the bloke unitl they say otherwise.
As far as I'm aware none of his competitors have come out and stated that he shouldn't be running and that's goods enough for me tbh.
I agree that there is not enough information on the advantages that the blades provide.
Look at the other side of the coin from a more cynical point of view:
How long before some nation starts sending able-bodied athletes to the Paralympics and winning all the medals.
LOL - ok, that wasn't exactly the land of my ancestors' finest hour
Does anyone know how his times compare to "able bodied" athletes?
That sums it up - you should be out training and working on the limbs and body you are born with, to win a medal because someone has improved the performance of the blades is pushing the rules a bit. I admire his bravery, tenacity and desire to overcome the loss of his legs, but if he wins a medal who should collect it? Pistorius or the team behind the development of his prosthetic legs?
didn't qualify for the final. I thought that Pistorius had lost his legs as a younger man, in fact he was born with 'boneless legs' and has had artificial lower limbs all his life.
Undoubtedly brave and single minded, I still consider his admission to the world championships was a mistake. Yes he will give hope to disabled and disadvantaged young people and children, however, if athletes with prosthetic limbs are allowed to compete against able bodied athletes, will it soon be acceptable for drug dependant athletes to take (e.g.) stimulants or beta blockers during competitions and if so how will their 'drug needs' be assessed?. It's a tricky and complicated subject
He was a bit touchy when interviewed by the BBC about whether he thought he might be considered an embarrassment. I thought it was a reasonable question and to add context they had previously said what an inspiration he is.
I admire the fella (here it comes) BUT an able-bodied athlete would not be allowed to enter with carbon-fibre springs attached to his legs. So I feel he should stick to the paras.
Alternatively why not let wheelchair users compete in the main Olympics against able-bodied athletes? You'd never see an able-bodied athlete win the marathon again because the top wheelchair athletes are half an hour quicker (hard to believe but true). So that is why there are separate games.
One problem with the paralympics though is that it can never be a level playing field because the disabilities vary in severity.