Amputee Sprinter Wins Olympic Appeal to Compete

Dr. Eggman writes "Oscar Pistorius, a 21-year-old South African double-amputee sprinter, has won his appeal filed with the Court of Arbitration for Sport. This overturns a ban imposed by the International Association of Athletics Federations, and allows Mr. Pistorius the chance to compete against other able-bodied athletes for a chance at a place on the South African team for the Beijing Olympics. He currently holds the 400-meter Paralympic world sprinting record, but must improve on his time by 1.01 seconds to meet the Olympic qualification standard. However, even if Pistorius fails to get the qualifying time, South African selectors could add Oscar to the Olympic 1,600-meter relay squad."

How unfair...

...to all athletes that have to drag their lower legs at each step, and not having the benefit of springlike limbs.

Re:How unfair...

Call me sentimental, but I tend to think that the inspirational value -- to everyone, not just aspiring legless athletes -- of letting this fellow compete trumps any concerns over fairness.

In any case, it matters not at all to me and I'm content to let the Olympic bureaucrats make whatever decision they see fit.

inspiration v. tech

the issue isn't this guy.....the issue is the precedent it sets. /. should be completely onboard with the olympic committe. In 50 years we WILL have cyborg legs....should that be allowed in the olympics?

I want a separate olympics.......an entertain me monkey olympics.

Re:inspiration v. tech

"In 50 years we WILL have cyborg legs....should that be allowed in the olympics?"

Standardize all the legs and inspect them the way NASCAR does cars. Restrict those with cyborg legs to racing in their own class.

Re:inspiration v. tech

What if I have a pair of shoes that can simulate the extra springiness that were similar to these artificial "legs"? I'm sure many sports groups would disqualify me for having non-standard or unfair equipment.

Granted, this guy isn't so good with these artificial legs that he's going to get a medal, or even qualify. But the idea that the rules that apply to an abled bodied person can be changed in a competitive sport to accommodate someone with disabilities just seems wrong.

What next, someone running a marathon with an oxygen bottle because of a medical condition? Maybe Tee Ball at the Olympics?

Inspirational is when someone overcomes their limitations at the Paralympics; not when someone asks the IAAF to change the rules.

Re:inspiration v. tech

Absolutely. It might be inspirational to see a dyslexic child competing in a spelling bee with the aid of a spellchecker, but it's hardly the point of the competition. The point of the Olympics is to look at the extremes which the human body can achieve. Whether prosthetics are an advantage or a disadvantage is almost beside the point, which is that they go beyond the remit and the purpose of the competition.

Re:How unfair...

Call me sentimental, but I tend to think that the inspirational value -- to everyone, not just aspiring legless athletes -- of letting this fellow compete trumps any concerns over fairness.

Yeah, that's usually how short-term benefits over long-term consequences work. They are sentimental, feel good, and you don't really see how bad it is for a long time. The worst part is that there aren't much feel good short-term benefits. This is guy is good, but according to what I've read, including TFS, isn't quite good enough for the Olympics. So in just a years time, the only thing we will be left with is the precedent that allows cyborgs in the Olympics.

Re:How unfair...

If they think he has an unfair advantage, why don't they get their legs amputated, too?

Re:How unfair...

If they think he has an unfair advantage, why don't they get their legs amputated, too?

If this guy takes home a gold and considering how competitive some folks are, it wouldn't surprise me if elite athletes start getting into "accidents" and having these put on them.

Re:How unfair...

If this guy takes home a gold...it wouldn't surprise me if elite athletes start getting into "accidents" and having these put on them.

I don't think it is likely to become an issue. From the summary: "He ... must improve on his time by 1.01 seconds to meet the Olympic qualification standard."

So if I understand correctly, he has to go 1.01 seconds faster than the best he has already done to meet the minimum standard that other Olympic sprinters need to meet in order to race at the Olympics.

Not to knock him -- it's very cool to overcome a disability and compete at the Olympics -- but it doesn't sound like he will be a top contender in the races; it sounds more like he just wants to participate in the Olympic races. In any case, I wish him the best!

Re:How unfair...

Did you actually read the article? It said that the legs did not give him a mechanical advantage:

Pistorius' lawyers countered with independent tests conducted by a team led by MIT professor Hugh M. Herr that claimed to show he doesn't gain any advantage over able-bodied runners.

CAS said the IAAF failed to prove that Pistorius' running blades give him an advantage.

"The panel was not persuaded that there was sufficient evidence of any metabolic advantage in favor of a double-amputee using the Cheetah Flex-Foot," CAS said. "Furthermore, the CAS panel has considered that the IAAF did not prove that the biomechanical effects of using this particular prosthetic device gives Oscar Pistorius an advantage over other athletes not using the device."

Let's face it - if someone is qualified to compete in other respects, but needs accommodations that provide no advantage, he should be allowed to compete. This is the same standard that people have used to try and prevent those with learning disabilities from getting extra time or other accommodations.

Re:How unfair...

If they think he has an unfair advantage, why don't they get their legs amputated, too?

It's not too much of a stretch. Apparently in baseball there's something called Tommy John surgery [everything2.com], where a ligament in the elbow is replaced by a (stronger) ligament from the wrist. It was originally intended to deal with injuries, although after pitchers found that their performance was better than it was before the injury some healthy players have become interested in getting the surgery performed.

Re:How unfair...

How is that unfair? He holds the Paralympic world record for the 400m, and he STILL has to improve on that by 1.01 seconds to meet qualification standard. I'm by no means an athlete, but I know that professional sprinters and swimmers find it so hard to improve on their own personal bests. Each second is a hardly won battle in it's self. I think he has a hard challenge ahead of him to be selected, and will still probably on place in an average middle position at the Olympics.

Cyborg Olympics

Sweet. Now I'm gonna go get my left arm hacked off and get a harpoon launcher installed for the javelin throw.

Or, to put it in a way slashdot understands...

1: Get amputation(s).
2: Get prosthetics with a mechanical advantage over mere flesh.
3: ???
4: Profit!

While you two losers are duking it out...

I'll have a Sybian installed on mine.

Re:Cyborg Olympics

Just make sure you always masturbate with the OTHER hand.

Trust me on this one.

Some Day

Someday, we'll look back at this event, with the power of hindsight and wonder how we failed to see the Cyborg War coming.

PDF of full decision

can be found here. [tas-cas.org]

I personally think this is the right decision. While obviously there is a line where replacement turns into enhancement, unless it's clearly crossed I'm in favor of letting everybody who has the ability compete. The IAAF did not show that there was enhancement (and even so, his best 400m time of 46.56s is over a second off the Olympic qualifying time of 45.55s).

My favorite part, where the panel finds that the IAAF biased the testing against him, and then told the press they were DQ'ing him before voting on it is here:

60. At this stage, in the Panel's view, the process began to go "off the rails". The correspondence between the IAAF nad Prof. Bruggemann shos that his instructions were to carry out the testing only when Mr Pistorius was running in a straight line after the acceleration phase. By the time that the IAAF commissioned the Cologne tests it was known that this was the part of the race in which Mr Pistorius usually ran at his fastest.

61. [...] IAAF's officials must have known that, by excluding the start and the acceleration phase, the results would create a distorted view of Mr Pistorius' advantages and/or disadvantages. [...]

62. The stori is not enhances by the fact that Dr. Robert Gailey, the scientist nominated by Mr Pistorius [...] was effectively "frozen out" to such an extent that he declined to attend the Cologne tests. He was informed that he would be allowed to attend only as an observer, with no input on the testing protocol or on the analysis.

68. The impression of prejudgement is also enhanced by the fact that Dr. Locatelli and other IAAF officials told the press before the vote was taken that Mr Pistorius would be banned from IAAF sanctioned events.

70. In the Panel's view, the manned in which the IAAF hendled the situation of MR Pistorius in the period from July 2007 to January 2008 fell short of the high standards that the international sporting community is entitield to expect from a federation such as the IAAF.

this is ridiculous

clearly these artificial limbs store kinetic energy in a radically different way. the biomechanics are obviously different. he's using different muscle groups. watch a video of him, and he clearly starts off slower than everyone else, and then speeds up a lot faster than everyone else: he's running on springs

god bless the guy, he's a phenomenal athlete. but he shouldn't be allowed to compete with runners with real feet. he's playing checkers when everyone else is playing blackjack. what he is doing is just not the same sport as what the other guys on the track are doing. and so he shouldn't compete with them. not because he doesn't deserve to just because he doesn't have feet, but simply because he's playing a different biomechanical game

Re:this is ridiculous

Normally when running, you tense up certain muscles just before foot strike, so your muscles acts like a spring to release part of that energy afterward. Normally, this means that you get tired cause your muscles are constantly in use (active energy storage). His legs are so set up so that they passively store this energy. He does not need put any effort into that part of the stride.

Not only that, the leg below the knee's importance in sprinting is relatively minor. Aside that the ankle/calf acting as an active shock absorber, nearly all the leg's energy is spent in the upper leg to drive the entire leg forward. His legs are considerably lighter than real human legs, and very much does make him run completely different.

Pistorius really does run differently. Because of the way his legs are constructed, his maximal running speed may never reach that of an unamputated human being, but his efficiency is beyond anything anyone else can achieve. He's running speed (measured in 10m segments) is far more consistent then any other runner, because he can maintain his full speed for much longer and with relatively less effort than anyone else.

This is not to say that he is an amazing athlete. He is. He has overcome incredible challenges, and he deserves recognition. But he does not belong in the Olympics the way that they are formulated right now. His artificial allow him to achieve feats of efficiency that simply cannot be reached with any human body no matter how well born and trained. I feel that many are letting themselves being clouded by the emotional aspect of this issue, and ignoring that this would be like letting someone on rollarblades grafted onto their feet compete in a standard track event.

That's fine...

...if they're letting regular athletes compete in the disabled categories as well. After all, what's good for the goose...

So where do you draw the line ?

Artificial limbs, I see that. Now what is with someone who had laser surgery on his eyes so he/she can see better ? Would you ban that person from a shooting match ? Even if he/she still can't see better than a top athlete ? If the person can see on par ? Or better ?

In the end, the questions we should ask ourselves probably are not about fairness but about the purpose of such games.

Re:So where do you draw the line ?

In the end, the questions we should ask ourselves probably are not about fairness but about the purpose of such games.

Main purpose: Milking the cash of pseudo-patriotic idiots.

Nailed it, didn't I? Be honest now...

Re:Doping goes to a whole new level

Ever watch that stupid robot battle show?

The O'Reilly factor?

Re:i'm an amputee too

You run on bicycles??