TO RUN or NOT TO RUN?

dolfette

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Posts
11,303
Media
0
Likes
109
Points
193
Sexuality
No Response
It's not, it's just there seems to have been precious little effort on the part of the IAAF to do that, their decision seems to based not on evidence but supposition.

Pardon my insertion but with it there I can't help but think that you may be cutting close to the quick.
yes, they should be putting real effort into finding a solution, instead of rooling out the "go play with the other cripples" line.

yup, his times. obviously this is why people are wondering.
legs or no legs, he's an impressive athlete.
he deserves the chance to compete free from doubts & sniping.
 

Onslow

Sexy Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2004
Posts
2,392
Media
0
Likes
42
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
oh, i'm sure it isn't.

but this is below the knee and instead he has two, high tech, carbon fibre spings.

he wants to compete because he's running times that could beat his rivals.

why is it unreasonable to make sure that everyone is running a fair race?


http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/images/nov05/images/prosf1a.jpg


But who makes the decision of what's fair? There are athletes who can run or sprint or do various other things in a far more superior manner than the average athlete. This is to some degree the nature of The Olympics. It is meant to highlight the best of the best and to see how they function with what they have. A prosthetic is not an unfair advantage, if it can even be considered one at all.

And where does it end? There are marathon runners using all sorts of footwear--or even running barefoot. It could be argued that they have advantages and therefore should be disqualified from marathons.

Where are the cutoff lines to be made?
 

dolfette

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Posts
11,303
Media
0
Likes
109
Points
193
Sexuality
No Response
But who makes the decision of what's fair? There are athletes who can run or sprint or do various other things in a far more superior manner than the average athlete. This is to some degree the nature of The Olympics. It is meant to highlight the best of the best and to see how they function with what they have. A prosthetic is not an unfair advantage, if it can even be considered one at all.

And where does it end? There are marathon runners using all sorts of footwear--or even running barefoot. It could be argued that they have advantages and therefore should be disqualified from marathons.

Where are the cutoff lines to be made?
in that case, why not let them all use those huge carbon springs, the ones that let anyone run at twice the speed?

because it's about pushing the limits of the human body.

if to footwear offered too much advantage it would be regulated too.

it's their job to decide reasonable cutoff lines!
they should be doing their jobs better in this case.
 

Onslow

Sexy Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2004
Posts
2,392
Media
0
Likes
42
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
no, i think those legs give him an advantage.

maybe they could design a type of leg that wouldn't, so that he could compete?

in that case, why not let them all use those huge carbon springs, the ones that let anyone run at twice the speed?

because it's about pushing the limits of the human body.

if to footwear offered too much advantage it would be regulated too.

it's their job to decide reasonable cutoff lines!
they should be doing their jobs better in this case.
Try wearing a prosthetic of any sort, and then come back and tell me you aren't pushing the limits of the human body. It's an alien object--not flesh and blood and that alone brings in dynamics of limitation and alternate methods for functioning.



And yes--they (the IOC people)should be doing a better job.
 

dolfette

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Posts
11,303
Media
0
Likes
109
Points
193
Sexuality
No Response
Try wearing a prosthetic of any sort, and then come back and tell me you aren't pushing the limits of the human body. It's an alien object--not flesh and blood and that alone brings in dynamics of limitation and alternate methods for functioning.

And yes--they (the IOC people)should be doing a better job.

yes, i know. i'll just go saw my leg off so i can play the "i know how it feels!" card.

i don't doubt that it's hard...but that doesn't mean anyone deserves a race advantage. that's not how sport works. you don't tell the footballer who is recovering from injury & surgery "hey, you can take a few steroids and we won't hold it against you...after all, you're at a disadvantage!".

how hard he had to work to get there doesn't change the race. he's running at times that could win, so obviously he's adjusted to the differences.

he deserves to compete in a fair race.
 

Onslow

Sexy Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2004
Posts
2,392
Media
0
Likes
42
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
yes, i know. i'll just go saw my leg off so i can play the "i know how it feels!" card.

i don't doubt that it's hard...but that doesn't mean anyone deserves a race advantage. that's not how sport works. you don't tell the footballer who is recovering from injury & surgery "hey, you can take a few steroids and we won't hold it against you...after all, you're at a disadvantage!".

how hard he had to work to get there doesn't change the race. he's running at times that could win, so obviously he's adjusted to the differences.

he deserves to compete in a fair race.
Um--uh-- don't saw off your leg--it would be a bloody mess.


Anyway, moving back to the issue of discrimination: What next? A person under a particular weight would be excluded because they are lighter and therefor can run faster with less weight? Or a person with longer legs can make longer strides therefore they have an advantage.

Discrimination is wrong no matter how you care to slice it.





and steroids or other enhancing drugs are never to be allowed--on that I can agree.
 

dolfette

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Posts
11,303
Media
0
Likes
109
Points
193
Sexuality
No Response
Um--uh-- don't saw off your leg--it would be a bloody mess.

Anyway, moving back to the issue of discrimination: What next? A person under a particular weight would be excluded because they are lighter and therefor can run faster with less weight? Or a person with longer legs can make longer strides therefore they have an advantage.

Discrimination is wrong no matter how you care to slice it.
natural advantages are part of sport.
unnatural advantages are something everyone wants to avoid.

why do you think it unreasonable to want the leg tested to ensure fairness? have one that functions no better than other top athletes, so that any medals he wins are purely on his own strengths.

*putting down the saw*
because i rather like my legs.
 

Theunbroken

Just Browsing
Joined
May 12, 2007
Posts
68
Media
2
Likes
0
Points
151
Location
scotland / preston
Sexuality
Unsure
Gender
Male
Sure, he should be alowed to compete, but i think it is possible to make artificial legs work better than a person's normal one.. with improved things to make him move faster (imagin those cool springy things that people like flip around on over cars and the such).. it would (IMO) make the man with the atrificial leg run faster
 

Shelby

Experimental Member
Joined
May 17, 2004
Posts
2,129
Media
0
Likes
15
Points
258
Location
in the internet
I really wasn't trying to be a smartass. I empathize with Onslow and this athlete. But I'm torn on this one. I would hate to see him discriminated against because he lost his lower legs. That would be literally adding insult to injury.

At the same time I think a team of sports physiologists would need to put together a study to determine whether or not these devices provide competitive advantage over regular lower legs and feet at a dead sprint. To begin with, I'm sure they're lighter. That's what I was trying, clumsily, to say before.

This is a tough one for me.
 

dong20

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Posts
6,058
Media
0
Likes
28
Points
183
Location
The grey country
Sexuality
No Response
I really wasn't trying to be a smartass. I empathize with Onslow and this athlete. But I'm torn on this one. I would hate to see him discriminated against because he lost his lower legs. That would be literally adding insult to injury.​


No offence was intended.

I also empathise but for me it's more black and white. Prove his prosthetic legs give him an unfair advantage or, let him compete.

At the same time I think a team of sports physiologists would need to put together a study to determine whether or not these devices provide competitive advantage over regular lower legs and feet at a dead sprint. To begin with, I'm sure they're lighter. That's what I was trying, clumsily, to say before. This is a tough one for me.

I agree, but it looks like they won't. I can only conclude that it's becuase it's easier to hide behind rules, and as I suspect (at least in part) refuse to face the fact that a 'disabled' athlete may be able to give able bodied competitors a fair fight on equal terms.

Take the enhancement variable out of the equation and it's easy. For me anyway.
 

dreamer20

Worshipped Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Posts
7,997
Media
3
Likes
23,732
Points
643
Gender
Male

SpeedoGuy

Sexy Member
Joined
May 18, 2004
Posts
4,166
Media
7
Likes
41
Points
258
Age
60
Location
Pacific Northwest, USA
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
While not the question you asked I think, overall that the IOC/IAAF are a collection of idiots with far more power than they deserve. The IOC are clearly lacking in judgement. Giving the 2012 Olympics to London is evidence of the last of of those assertions

I can remember Juan Antonio Samaranch, a Barcelona native, vociferously denying that his chairmanship of the IOC had anything to do with Barcelona being chosen as an Olympic host city.

Riiiiiiight.
 

D_Gunther Snotpole

Account Disabled
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Posts
13,632
Media
0
Likes
73
Points
193
I think a team of sports physiologists would need to put together a study to determine whether or not these devices provide competitive advantage over regular lower legs and feet at a dead sprint.

I agree.
It's not enough to say we'll greenlight what he's doing until we have proof that his prosthetics give him an unfair advantage.
We should make no assumption either way, and say he'll get the green light once investigations confirm that he has no unfair advantage.
 

JustAsking

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2004
Posts
3,217
Media
0
Likes
33
Points
268
Location
Ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I think this is a difficult matter to decide. I also think you guys are not reading Dolfette's posts very carefully. She wants him to run, but not if there is any unfair advantage. Her complaint is that the organization is not putting any effort into making an equitable determination.

Also, I am sure performing with any kind of necessary prosthetic is extremely difficult and even painful. But on the other hand, I am not convinced that all prosthetic designs are immune from inferring an unfair advantage. Both of these statements can be true. And if they are, athletes with necessary prosthetics deserve some kind of quality deliberation beyond what they are getting now.
 

dreamer20

Worshipped Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Posts
7,997
Media
3
Likes
23,732
Points
643
Gender
Male
The verdict is in! :eek:

Sadly Oscar Pistorious has been banned from competition. :frown1:


AFP: Olympics ban for "Blade Runner" Pistorius


Excerpt:

a scientific investigation into his springy prosthetics carried out by the Institute of Biomechanics at Cologne University last November found that they gave him a clear competitive edge over such athletes.
 

faceking

Cherished Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Posts
7,426
Media
6
Likes
281
Points
208
Location
Mavs, NOR * CAL
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Oscar Pistorius wants to be the first amputee runner to compete in the Olympics but the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF), has already moved to block him from the Olympics, with a new ruling banning "technical aids". They believe that the technology of his prosthetics might give him an unfair advantage over sprinters using their natural legs. See the link:

BBC NEWS | Africa | Amputee athlete aims for Olympics


At least three disabled athletes have competed in the Summer Olympics:George Eyser (of the U.S.A.) won a gold medal in gymnastics while competing on a wooden leg at the 1904 Games in St. Louis; Neroli Fairhall (of New Zealand) a paraplegic competed in archery in the 1984 Games in Los Angeles; and Marla Runyan (of the U.S.A), a legally-blind runner competed in the 1,500 metres Olympics in Sydney.



Do you feel that the IAAF is right to bar Pistorious form Olympic competition?

Same reason why wheelchair participants are in a separate category than runners in marathons.
 

dreamer20

Worshipped Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Posts
7,997
Media
3
Likes
23,732
Points
643
Gender
Male
yup, his times. obviously this is why people are wondering.
legs or no legs, he's an impressive athlete.
he deserves the chance to compete free from doubts & sniping.

:arms:
Now Pistorious has the chance to compete as he won his appeal of the IAAF's decision! :fing02:

http://www.cbc.ca/olympics/athletics/story/2008/07/11/pistorius-ome.html

Excerpt:

On May 16,2008 the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) gave Pistorius the green light to compete in able-bodied races, overturning a previous ruling by the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF)...


Pistorius to try again:fingersx:

Pistorius plans on competing in a 200-metre race at a meet in Lignano, Italy, on Sunday in order to work on his sprinting. His next official attempt at qualifying for Beijing in the 400 will take place in Lucerne, Switzerland, on Wednesday. He has always maintained that qualifying for Beijing has been a lofty goal, saying "it was always going to be a very difficult goal. I have to be realistic and I have to admit the chances are slim."

"But even if the Olympic dream doesn't come down this time... I'm still very happy," he said.