NationStates Jolt Archive

Pistorius eligible for Olympics

Double-amputee sprinter Oscar Pistorius has won an appeal to compete for a place in the Beijing Olympics.

In January, athletics' governing body the IAAF banned the 21-year-old South African from able-bodied events.

It was claimed Pistorius' prosthetic limbs give him an unfair advantage, but he disagreed and went to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (Cas).

"We have an opportunity to chase my dream of participating in the Olympics - if not in 2008 in 2012," he said.

"It is such a significant day in the sport - I'm so happy with the outcome. the last few days have been very stressful. this is one of the best days of life.

"I hope this silences the crazy theories circulating about my having an unfair advantage."

Cas said in a statement that the IAAF had not proved competition rules had been contravened.

"On the basis of the evidence brought by the experts called by both parties, the panel was not persuaded that there was sufficient evidence of any metabolic advantage in favour of the double amputee using the Cheetah Flex-Foot," the statement said.

The panel emphasised that their verdict only applied to the individual case of the South African.

It was also stressed that any advancements in the prosthetic-limb technology used by Pistorius could be contested by the IAAF again.

"The panel does not exclude the possibility that, with future advances in scientific knowledge, and a testing regime designed and carried out to the satisfaction of both parties, the IAAF might in future be in a position to prove that the existing Cheetah Flex-Foot model provides Oscar Pistorius with an advantage over other athletes."

Pistorius is hoping to make the Olympic 'A' standard time of 45.55 seconds for the 400m or the 'B' qualifier of 45.95 if no other athlete from his country attains the higher one.

His best time over the distance in 2007 was 46.56 and his personal best is 46.46.

"There are some good South African runners over that distance and every national federation is allowed to take three athletes in an event provided they meet an 'A' standard and only one athlete if they can only meet the 'B' standard," said BBC Radio 5 Live athletics correspondent Mike Costello.

"At this stage Oscar Pistorius has only an outside chance of making that time.

"But now, with the impetus, with the incentive of the Olympic Games, if he can get invites to the big meetings around the summer, then maybe, with the conditions right, he can be dragged through to an even quicker time for what would be a landmark appearance at the Olympics.

"No other leg amputee has ever managed to compete at the Olympic Games."

The South African was born without fibulas - the long, thin outer bone between the knee and ankle - and was 11 months old when his legs were amputated below the knee.

He began running competitively four years ago to treat a rugby injury, and nine months later won the 200m at the 2004 Paralympic Games in Athens. Nicknamed the "Blade Runner," Pistorius has set world records in the 100m, 200m and 400m in Paralympic events.

He finished second in the 400m at the South African national championships last year against able-bodied runners.

Pistorius added: "My focus throughout this appeal has been to ensure that disabled athletes be given the chance to compete and compete fairly with able-bodied athletes.

"I look forward to continuing my quest to qualify for the Olympics."

link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics/athletics/7243481.stm)

So, what does NSG think?

Personally, I'd back him to hilt --- if he was racing with standard prosthetics, not special racing ones. I feel that doing so is using mechanical assistance to improve his skill, not just bring him up to par with a normal human. So racing 'shoes' on his normal legs, yeah, go for it. Special racing blades that are basically giant springs? No, I don't think so.

If they give him an advantage, he should not be allowed in. If they don't, then there is no reason why he should be stopped.

My guess is that the committee that looked at this looked into the mechanical properties of the prosthetic. And they clearly found that it gave him no unfair advantage.

So it sounds good to me.

From my understanding, the IAAF was not able to demonstrate how his prosthetics give him any sort of unfair advantage over someone else. So there was no reasonable basis to prevent him from competing. One would think that, if there was such an obvious advantage to the prosthetics, it would be easily shown. The onus of proof is on the IAAF to show it is an unfair advantage. And, based on this statement:

"The panel does not exclude the possibility that, with future advances in scientific knowledge, and a testing regime designed and carried out to the satisfaction of both parties, the IAAF might in future be in a position to prove that the existing Cheetah Flex-Foot model provides Oscar Pistorius with an advantage over other athletes."

it seems to indicate that the IAAF did not conduct any testing to determine the legitimacy of the prosthetics. I may be reading too much into these words, but it almost seems like the IAAF decided to ban him because they assumed the prosthetics gave him an advantage.

If they give him an advantage, he should not be allowed in. If they don't, then there is no reason why he should be stopped.

Yeah, what I feel as well.

link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics/athletics/7243481.stm)

So, what does NSG think?

Personally, I'd back him to hilt --- if he was racing with standard prosthetics, not special racing ones. I feel that doing so is using mechanical assistance to improve his skill, not just bring him up to par with a normal human. So racing 'shoes' on his normal legs, yeah, go for it. Special racing blades that are basically giant springs? No, I don't think so.

My thoughts exactly, but then the bolded is what he has...

My thoughts exactly, but then the bolded is what he has...

Standard prosthetics would put him at a clear disadvantage. The mechanical properties and movement really don't mimic standard gait (especially in running) very well.

I haven't seen the actual studies, but I believe that the flex-foot design is meant to get amputees much closer to normal gait. I get the impression that the different models are much like different types of shoes - you have different models for long-distance running, sprinting, walking, etc.

An easy solution to this is just to give him prosthetics but use ones that have been purposefully made inefficient (so as to put him on the same level as the other athletes).

Standard prosthetics would put him at a clear disadvantage. The mechanical properties and movement really don't mimic standard gait (especially in running) very well.

I haven't seen the actual studies, but I believe that the flex-foot design is meant to get amputees much closer to normal gait. I get the impression that the different models are much like different types of shoes - you have different models for long-distance running, sprinting, walking, etc.

Well, not necessarily directly standard. I guess my biggest objection is really to the fact that he's using what are purely 'racing legs' as it were. An athlete still has to walk on his legs for normal use.

Maybe the way to solve it would be to do a full mechanical analysis, and only permit models that were not better than standard human legs. I'm not sure where that would leave this case though.

(Incidentally, this can be a nice general discussion on the whole area, not just this particular case)

Well, not necessarily directly standard. I guess my biggest objection is really to the fact that he's using what are purely 'racing legs' as it were. An athlete still has to walk on his legs for normal use.

Like I said, though, I get the impression that the differences in the different models are more like the differences in different shoes.

Maybe the way to solve it would be to do a full mechanical analysis, and only permit models that were not better than standard human legs. I'm not sure where that would leave this case though.

Indeed, that would probably be best.

Although I would guess that information provided by the company and the various background studies used to create the design could provide a panel like this with really good insight into that question.

Hey, do you think I should enter the Olympics, or would my wheelchair give me an unfair advantage?:D

Hey, do you think I should enter the Olympics, or would my wheelchair give me an unfair advantage?:D

I think you should try out for the pole vault. ;)

the guy has no lower legs. I'd call that a disadvantage. Racing blade prosthetics may approximate the running ability of a normal human, but he'll never have an advantage over real legs with current technology. His achievements are a testament to his abilities, training, and stamina far more than an indication of some special advantage from having no legs.

Damn cyborgs taking our sports and women away... There should be laws against them. /joke

the guy has no lower legs. I'd call that a disadvantage. Racing blade prosthetics may approximate the running ability of a normal human, but he'll never have an advantage over real legs with current technology. His achievements are a testament to his abilities, training, and stamina far more than an indication of some special advantage from having no legs.

This. Just because he can attempt to qualify doesn't mean he will, either.

I think they should fit him with Johnny Number 5 tank tracks ;)

An easy solution to this is just to give him prosthetics but use ones that have been purposefully made inefficient (so as to put him on the same level as the other athletes).
Oh, great idea. And while we're at it, why do we make the fastest runners carry backpacks full of rocks, so as to put them on the same level as the other athletes?
Did you read the damn article?

"On the basis of the evidence brought by the experts called by both parties, the panel was not persuaded that there was sufficient evidence of any metabolic advantage in favour of the double amputee using the Cheetah Flex-Foot," the statement said.

Note: insufficient evidence of any advantage.
The ones he's using aren't giving him an advantage but you still don't think that's enough?

If they give him an advantage, he should not be allowed in. If they don't, then there is no reason why he should be stopped.
Again, read the damn article.
On another note, why haven't I seen any threads by you people so ready to condemn a double amputee for using technology to help him run on the unfairness of all the other technologies being developed and used to help people win?
For example the Speedo LZR Racer swimsuit, which has been banned by some countries for giving swimmers an unfair advantage but okayed by the IOC. So far close to 40 world records have been broken this year alone by swimmers wearing this suit.
Or is okay when able-bodied people do it?

I have no problem with disabled people qualifying for merit to the olympics (I think a swimmer did in Europe recently) but this guys limbs give him not only a huge advantage over the paralympic athletes but normal athletes aswell.... Maybe if he could be given limbs with no major advantage/disadvantage, i'd agree with it but atm... i think the olympics should not admit him (his limbs are basically the same result as a 200m sprinter on super steroids with no leagal/sporting implications IMHO)

I saw a news story on Mr. Pistorius some time ago, and found it quite interesting. For what it's worth, the guy really is a world-class athlete, and most of the objections that have been raised boil down to, "But....but....he's supposed to be disabled! A disabled person shouldn't be able to do that! He must have some unfair advantage!"

Thing is, though, there's not any actual evidence that this is the case. His prosthetics are indeed specifically designed for running. So are the shoes all the other athletes will be wearing. Being designed for running is not, in itself, an advantage. If it were demonstrated that the prosthetics gave some advantage that natural legs could not, then the Olympic committee would be right in banning those prosthetics, but as long as they simply bring him up to par, I see no reason Pistorius shouldn't compete alongside other world-class athletes.

I saw a news story on Mr. Pistorius some time ago, and found it quite interesting. For what it's worth, the guy really is a world-class athlete, and most of the objections that have been raised boil down to, "But....but....he's supposed to be disabled! A disabled person shouldn't be able to do that! He must have some unfair advantage!"

Thing is, though, there's not any actual evidence that this is the case. His prosthetics are indeed specifically designed for running. So are the shoes all the other athletes will be wearing. Being designed for running is not, in itself, an advantage. If it were demonstrated that the prosthetics gave some advantage that natural legs could not, then the Olympic committee would be right in banning those prosthetics, but as long as they simply bring him up to par, I see no reason Pistorius shouldn't compete alongside other world-class athletes.


That statement, although not direct based on mine, makes mine look pathetic.. and i'll accept that. If they allow him to run in the main olympics in Beejing and he whoops ass, we'll know that 2 prosthetic limbs = to much advantage. I see your post as a why not let him in and see what happens for future precedence post and i must concede my original point to yours


basically, we wont know unless he is allowed to compete at least in the heats

Oh, great idea. And while we're at it, why do we make the fastest runners carry backpacks full of rocks, so as to put them on the same level as the other athletes?
Did you read the damn article?

"On the basis of the evidence brought by the experts called by both parties, the panel was not persuaded that there was sufficient evidence of any metabolic advantage in favour of the double amputee using the Cheetah Flex-Foot," the statement said.

Note: insufficient evidence of any advantage.
The ones he's using aren't giving him an advantage but you still don't think that's enough? You're right, of course. If it doesn't give him a significant advantage then there's no problem. I should have read this article but didn't because I assumed it was the essentially the same as several others I've read previously.

Again, read the damn article.
On another note, why haven't I seen any threads by you people so ready to condemn a double amputee for using technology to help him run on the unfairness of all the other technologies being developed and used to help people win?
For example the Speedo LZR Racer swimsuit, which has been banned by some countries for giving swimmers an unfair advantage but okayed by the IOC. So far close to 40 world records have been broken this year alone by swimmers wearing this suit.
Or is okay when able-bodied people do it?No, but a problem would exist if only one of the people entering were able to use the suit. It doesn't matter what the rules are for the competition -- rules are arbitrary -- but they must be fairly applied.

No, but a problem would exist if only one of the people entering were able to use the suit. It doesn't matter what the rules are for the competition -- rules are arbitrary -- but they must be fairly applied.
But only some people can use it. Italy has banned it, so no Italian swimmers can use it. Japanese swimmers can only use Japanese products, so they're out too. Anyone who is licenced to wear suits made by other companies can't wear it. Anyone who can't afford the damn thing can't wear it.
That adds up to a lot of people.

But only some people can use it. Italy has banned it, so no Italian swimmers can use it. Japanese swimmers can only use Japanese products, so they're out too. Anyone who is licenced to wear suits made by other companies can't wear it. Anyone who can't afford the damn thing can't wear it.
That adds up to a lot of people.I don't consider it the IOC's problem if specific countries ban it for their athletes, or have restrictions based on their financial obligations. The IOC is free to determine whatever rules of entry they like. If people think those rules are unfair then they shouldn't enter the competition. Also, just because the suit is expensive does not mean that it is inherently unfair to the other athletes. Many people might not be able to enter because they cannot afford to train like these athletes do. It is unfair that they cannot? Maybe, maybe not. Regardless, that training is an effective requirement of entry.

The technology for the flex foot prosthetic he's using has also been developed into a boot that a normal person can wear. The flex of the carbon blades gives a person a tremendous stride. It's not just the lengthening of the legs wearing the boots either, you can also jump amazingly high. Seeing those demonstrations of leaping ability wearing flex blade boots makes me doubt if the findings are accurate. But how do you determine such things? A standard type prosthetic is also unreasonable, without ankle flex you can't run. It's a very grey area. It's nice to see him be able to compete but expect a lot of challenges to this ruling if he should medal. Any record he might set I'm sure would not be sanctified.

If they allow him to run in the main olympics in Beejing and he whoops ass, we'll know that 2 prosthetic limbs = to much advantage.

Or it could, you know, mean that he's a better athlete? One who has trained specifically to offset a pretty large disadvantage? As long as the energy return rate on the blades is lower than what 'normal' human legs gets (and so far, it is), if he wins that probably just means he's kick ass in every respect. And cute, but that's not really on topic...

I think you should try out for the pole vault. ;)

LOL:D

I saw a news story on Mr. Pistorius some time ago, and found it quite interesting. For what it's worth, the guy really is a world-class athlete, and most of the objections that have been raised boil down to, "But....but....he's supposed to be disabled! A disabled person shouldn't be able to do that! He must have some unfair advantage!"

Thing is, though, there's not any actual evidence that this is the case. His prosthetics are indeed specifically designed for running. So are the shoes all the other athletes will be wearing. Being designed for running is not, in itself, an advantage. If it were demonstrated that the prosthetics gave some advantage that natural legs could not, then the Olympic committee would be right in banning those prosthetics, but as long as they simply bring him up to par, I see no reason Pistorius shouldn't compete alongside other world-class athletes.

QFT

I don't consider it the IOC's problem if specific countries ban it for their athletes, or have restrictions based on their financial obligations. The IOC is free to determine whatever rules of entry they like. If people think those rules are unfair then they shouldn't enter the competition. Also, just because the suit is expensive does not mean that it is inherently unfair to the other athletes. Many people might not be able to enter because they cannot afford to train like these athletes do. It is unfair that they cannot? Maybe, maybe not. Regardless, that training is an effective requirement of entry.
So your argument basically comes down to this:
He shouldn't be allowed to compete because he's using something that other athletes can't use which might give him an unfair advantage.
Yet.....
You're perfectly happy with other athletes using something (The Speedo LZR Racer swimsuit) that other athletes cannot use and which definitely gives them an advantage.
hmmmm...
why the difference? I can't see any, other than total number of legs per athlete...

nice one dragging in training. strawman much, do you?

I don't understand this fear of allowing a guy whose limbs are prosthetic to compete. Are people afraid that "naturals" will lose the race to someone who's overcome his injuries through bionic prosthetics?

Not only do I hope this guy's allowed to compete, but I hope he uses the prosthetics that give him the greatest possible advantage and wins, breaking all world records in the process. People with artificial limbs shouldn't be denied the chance to set new boundaries in physical accomplishment just because they're not "real".

If they give him an advantage, he should not be allowed in. If they don't, then there is no reason why he should be stopped.

Quite.

He won't win anyway. I can guarantee he won't medal, and I'll be shocked if he makes a final.

If they allow him to run in the main olympics in Beejing and he whoops ass, we'll know that 2 prosthetic limbs = to much advantage.
And we'll also know that whoever wins in any other sport at the Olympics obviously has too much advantage over the other athletes. And so they need to be thoroughly investigated to find out what they're doing that gives them this blatantly unfair advantage. Is it diet? training? coaching? equipment? genetics? determination?
whatever it is, I hope the IOC do their best to uncover what makes these people champions and bans it, and them, before the next Olympics!

So your argument basically comes down to this:
He shouldn't be allowed to compete because he's using something that other athletes can't use which might give him an unfair advantage.
Yet.....
You're perfectly happy with other athletes using something (The Speedo LZR Racer swimsuit) that other athletes cannot use and which definitely gives them an advantage.
hmmmm...
why the difference? I can't see any, other than total number of legs per athlete...

nice one dragging in training. strawman much, do you?Simply because the other athletes can't use the legs (as in, it's actually impossible). Arbitrary restrictions are one thing, but this would be quite another (if it were to give him an advantage).

Simply because the other athletes can't use the legs (as in, it's actually impossible). Arbitrary restrictions are one thing, but this would be quite another (if it were to give him an advantage).
Well, he can't use any of the muscles and tendons below the knee. Or is that not an advantage to the other athletes?

And, sigh, obviously I need to state this again cause it's not sinking in: Other athletes can't use the Speedo swimsuit for political, business or financial reasons. Regardless of the reasons, they CAN'T use something that DEFINITELY gives the user an advantage.
You can't dismiss it by stating, "they could if they wanted to" because they CAN'T. A Japanese or Italian swimmer is not allowed to use the Speedo swimsuit. If they did, they would be banned by their sporting bodies from ever competing again. So it is 'actually' impossible for them to do so. Yet, despite knowing this, and despite seeing 37 world records broken in just the past 3 months alone by wearers of the Speedo suit, the IOC has still decided it's okay for only those lucky enough to have either the money, the sponsorship and the nationality to wear one. (side note: one can only guess how many 'gifts' the IOC board received from Speedo prior to making this decision)

Here, however, is something which doesn't give anyone an advantage but allows a gifted and determined athlete to compete.

Heck, he can't use the shoes designed specifically for each athlete he's competing against. Why are you okay with that, but not him using prosthetics? Their shoes give them 'unfair' advantage over him and it's 'actually' impossible for him to use their shoes.


Only thing I can see that's bothering you is the simple fact he's disabled and you feel uncomfortable being confronted with the fact he might be better than abled bodied athletes.

Well, he can't use any of the muscles and tendons below the knee. Or is that not an advantage to the other athletes?

And, sigh, obviously I need to state this again cause it's not sinking in: Other athletes can't use the Speedo swimsuit for political, business or financial reasons. Regardless of the reasons, they CAN'T use something that DEFINITELY gives the user an advantage.
You can't dismiss it by stating, "they could if they wanted to" because they CAN'T. A Japanese or Italian swimmer is not allowed to use the Speedo swimsuit. If they did, they would be banned by their sporting bodies from ever competing again. So it is 'actually' impossible for them to do so. Yet, despite knowing this, and despite seeing 37 world records broken in just the past 3 months alone by wearers of the Speedo suit, the IOC has still decided it's okay for only those lucky enough to have either the money, the sponsorship and the nationality to wear one. (side note: one can only guess how many 'gifts' the IOC board received from Speedo prior to making this decision)

Here, however, is something which doesn't give anyone an advantage but allows a gifted and determined athlete to compete.

Heck, he can't use the shoes designed specifically for each athlete he's competing against. Why are you okay with that, but not him using prosthetics? Their shoes give them 'unfair' advantage over him and it's 'actually' impossible for him to use their shoes.


Only thing I can see that's bothering you is the simple fact he's disabled and you feel uncomfortable being confronted with the fact he might be better than abled bodied athletes.You misunderstand, silly. I don't have a problem with the guy if his prosthetics don't give him a significant advantage over the normal status of the other runners - which includes their typical designer footwear and extra tendons. If they did, that would be unfair to other runners because it would actually be impossible for them to match the advantage.

However, those people who are unable to use the swimsuit are either 1) Politically prevented (which is not the IOC's problem) 2) Contractually prevented (also not the IOC's problem), 3) Financially prevented (The IOC sets their own rules and if you disagree with those rules then start flaming THEM). I'm not justifying their rules to you, and that has never been my intention.

I don't feel uncomfortable with this guy being better than the others. He's most likely not, anyway, since from what I understand he hasn't even gotten the minimum required time for entry. So please, enough. I am not irrationally against this guy and in fact I think he's got a pretty awesome story, being a professional runner and all.

I have yet to encounter any situation in which being disabled gives one an advantage.

Oh, great idea. And while we're at it, why do we make the fastest runners carry backpacks full of rocks, so as to put them on the same level as the other athletes?


http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/hb.html

I have yet to encounter any situation in which being disabled gives one an advantage.

Speaking in tongues?

http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/hb.html

That was hilarious and tragic simultaniously. Thank you.

Well, he can't use any of the muscles and tendons below the knee. Or is that not an advantage to the other athletes?

And, sigh, obviously I need to state this again cause it's not sinking in: Other athletes can't use the Speedo swimsuit for political, business or financial reasons. Regardless of the reasons, they CAN'T use something that DEFINITELY gives the user an advantage.
You can't dismiss it by stating, "they could if they wanted to" because they CAN'T. A Japanese or Italian swimmer is not allowed to use the Speedo swimsuit. If they did, they would be banned by their sporting bodies from ever competing again. So it is 'actually' impossible for them to do so. Yet, despite knowing this, and despite seeing 37 world records broken in just the past 3 months alone by wearers of the Speedo suit, the IOC has still decided it's okay for only those lucky enough to have either the money, the sponsorship and the nationality to wear one. (side note: one can only guess how many 'gifts' the IOC board received from Speedo prior to making this decision)

Here, however, is something which doesn't give anyone an advantage but allows a gifted and determined athlete to compete.

Heck, he can't use the shoes designed specifically for each athlete he's competing against. Why are you okay with that, but not him using prosthetics? Their shoes give them 'unfair' advantage over him and it's 'actually' impossible for him to use their shoes.


Only thing I can see that's bothering you is the simple fact he's disabled and you feel uncomfortable being confronted with the fact he might be better than abled bodied athletes.

Intrestingly enough, the one-peices of the australian rowing team are based on the same suit. This is in a sport where the aerodynamics of the rowers are far less important than of the boat itself (well the boats "waterdyamics").
Also intresting is that the in the 1st rowing world cup of this year, having had a fairly poor season last year, australia won both the mens and womens 8s, wearing their new one-peices.

Interestingly enough, the one-pieces of the Australian rowing team are based on the same suit. This is in a sport where the aerodynamics of the rowers are far less important than of the boat itself (well the boats "waterdynamics").
Also interesting is that the in the 1st rowing world cup of this year, having had a fairly poor season last year, Australia won both the mens and womens 8s, wearing their new one-pieces.I wonder if they'd gain any efficiency by simply not wearing clothes? That'd shave off a bit of extra weight... :p

Speaking in tongues?

I'm not even going to dignify that with an Με βοηθήστε Λόρδος! το πνεύμα είναι επάνω σε με! Похвала Иисус! Могло я добираться Аминь! answer.


Wow, you were right. It is easier in the chair!:D

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics/athletics/7141302.stm)

A scientific study revealed that Pistorius, nicknamed "Blade Runner", used 25% less energy than able-bodied runners to run at the same speed.

But since his personal best is well short of the qualifying time, he's not going to be at the Olympics.

The man lost his legs at like 1 year old. It's not like he was a runner, hacked off his legs to get this supposed advantage, and now is making a case.

I say let him in with the special prosthetics, or let him in with something more primitive and also make ALL runners run barefoot so they cannot take advantage of cushioned insoles and our high-tech footwear's properties. :D

I wonder if they'd gain any efficiency by simply not wearing clothes? That'd shave off a bit of extra weight... :p

You see your joking. You don't have a "secret society" that like to row naked on your river at night. :eek: