Oscar Pistorius

[mune ni kamome]

Have I read this right. Much as I admire this guy who is an amputee and runs on springs surely he can't be allowed to run in the able bodied Olympics. What happens when they produce some super-duper XR4i springs and he wins by 30 metres. Then everyone will want some. It's only a short hop to watching a load of robots racing.

 

[albion534]

i dont think these springs have nitrox oxide like fast and furious

 

[brightonlass2009]

Er...his springs don't actually give him an unfair advantage. Put him up against Bolt and I'm about 100% certain Bolt would still completely thrash him...

 

[turienzo's lovechild]

Oscar Pistorius 100m best: 10.91
10th fastest time (mens): 9.85
10th place in 2008 Olympics: 10.03

Oscar Pistorius 200m best: 21.41
10th fastest time (mens): 19.73
10th place in 2008 Olympics: 20.59

Oscar Pistorius 400m best: 45.07
10th fastest time (mens): 44.05
10th place in 2008 Olympics: 45.39 (Pistorius' best ever time would've seen him finish 5th)

 

[ATFC Seagull]

Er...his springs don't actually give him an unfair advantage. Put him up against Bolt and I'm about 100% certain Bolt would still completely thrash him...

That is of course a million miles from the point.

Horrible debate this, can see both sides of the argument.

 

[turienzo's lovechild]

That is of course a million miles from the point.

Horrible debate this, can see both sides of the argument.

why is it a million miles from the point? surely the main argument against 'letting' him compete is that these springs give him an "unfair advantage" which they don't seem to do

let him in i say!

 

[ATFC Seagull]

why is it a million miles from the point? surely the main argument against 'letting' him compete is that these springs give him an "unfair advantage" which they don't seem to do

let him in i say!

So because he can't beat the fastest man ever on the planet, that therefore proves he is gaining no advantage?

 

[Paddy B]

why is it a million miles from the point? surely the main argument against 'letting' him compete is that these springs give him an "unfair advantage" which they don't seem to do

let him in i say!

I think the OP's point is, that it sets a precedent.

 

[turienzo's lovechild]

I think the OP's point is, that it sets a precedent.

i don't necessarily see any problem with setting a precedent for paralympians competing with "able bodied athletes"........as long as there is some form of limit to the 'tools' you can use to help you compete....i've always got the impression that the things pistorius use are fairly similar to human legs? i maybe wrong

obviously i don't want to watch a load of cyborgs competing, but i don't see a problem with this

 

[skipper734]

They have done loads of tests with him, to determine weather he physically has an advantage. The answer is he gains no advantage.

 

[00snook]

obviously i don't want to watch a load of cyborgs competing, but i don't see a problem with this

What?

Surely a cyborg Olympics would be awesome.

 

[turienzo's lovechild]

So because he can't beat the fastest man ever on the planet, that therefore proves he is gaining no advantage?

nope, didn't say that, the other person did

unless he's shit, it doesn't seem to be giving him that much of an advantage....it's not like his personal best is that great

 

[beorhthelm]

so he doesnt gain an advantage now. what about two or ten years time? how are you to limit the performance of such prosthetics in the future to not offer an advantage, only allow them if they are slower than the current fastest able bodied? then whats the point?

 

[teaboy]

so he doesnt gain an advantage now. what about two or ten years time? how are you to limit the performance of such prosthetics in the future to not offer an advantage, only allow them if they are slower than the current fastest able bodied? then whats the point?

In the same way that current rules apply to cycling. There are plenty of 'tools' currently available that improve the speed of bikes and the rider that are banned by the governing body. These are reviewed from time to time and the list of what is/isn't allowed changes accordingly.

 

[strings]

so he doesnt gain an advantage now. what about two or ten years time? how are you to limit the performance of such prosthetics in the future to not offer an advantage, only allow them if they are slower than the current fastest able bodied? then whats the point?

Isn't that why 'smart limbs' were banned at paralympic events? It seems to me that these things are already monitored and policed.

 

[tricky]

I think it opens up a massive can of worms. The reviews of the 'blades' were mixed, one showed that he did get an advantage as the design of the blades did actually give him more spring and recouped more energy than human legs, but the second review challenged this and found that the benefit was not significant. The key is that the tests and scientific reviews are not perfect and that it will be very difficult to tell whether a prosthesis provides a significant improvement to a specific person, in a sport where hundreths of a second are important.
However - a big up to Natalie du toit - who has competed in able bodied swimming events even though she is missing a leg!!

 

[Deleted member 18477]

give the guy a break. he has no f***ing legs!

 

[teaboy]

However - a big up to Natalie du toit - who has competed in able bodied swimming events even though she is missing a leg!!

Anyone who WANTS to swim 10k should be banned for mental health reasons!

 

[Mental Lental]

This thread suddenly seems much more relevant.

 

[Mental Lental]

It's a strange situation where we cry foul about the chance of people having an advantage because of potential drug taking and think nothing of allowing a man with metal legs in to the 400m 2nd round.