Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

S. African amputee runner can seek Olympic spot

Associated Press

Latest comment posted at 11:12 PM EDT 16/05/08

Court of Arbitration for Sport rules that 400-metre sprinter's Cheetah blades not proved to give him unfair advantage ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Martyn Whitt from Canada writes: athletics is a joke if they're not doing drugs they have fake legs...hahahaha what foolishness
  2. Alex Yaxmos from Canada writes: I have a feeling they just open a Pandora's box into the world of athletics.
  3. Bryan Vanderkruk from Canada writes: if there's no advantage over able-bodied athletes, then by all means allow him to compete in the Olympics. But they give him an obvious advantage over other disabled athletes (RE: world record holder) and he should then not be allowed to compete in the paralympics.
    It should be one or the other.
  4. asdf asdf from Canada writes: ^ this guy makes a good point
  5. Dan P from Calgary, Canada writes: If I'm not mistaken, I believe Prof. Hugh Herr, who conducted the "independent tests" that formed the appeal is also a double amputee. Maybe I'm being mean, but it does seem much more likely that Prof. Herr would be biased towards Pistorius. This is a pretty serious matter - like a previous poster said, with a pandora's box of implications for world athletics. I would think it would be advisable for these groups to do a thorough review, with several independent researchers, on this matter.
  6. l r from ottawa, Canada writes: As dedicated and talented as he may be, Oscar Pisrtorius should not be allowed to compete in he Olympics. Where do you draw the line? what happens if the engineers who make the Cheetah prosthetic device improve it, so that there is an advantage. ? Is it going to require a panel of engineers to decide who can compete in the Olympics. This is one more case of judicial stupidity where "human rights" replace "common sense". Where do they draw the line? what if he takes up swimming and has a prosthetic with flippers attached? All prosthetic devices should be banned.
  7. Rtab 2 from Canada writes: I'm a recreational athlete who also happens to be an amputee. I feel that the CAS made the right decision, although I agree with Dan P that a thorough, independent review wouldn't be a bad thing. Anecdotally speaking, I can't imagine that Pistorius' carbon fibre legs give any advantage over an able-bodied athlete, hard as that is for some to fathom. It's been my experience, having played with and watched some high performance amputee athletes, that no matter what the innovation in prosthetics, nothing beats well developed flesh, blood and bone.

    Martyn Whitt: "...fake legs"? Gimme a break.

    Bryan: I'm not sure your argument holds water. Other amputees have access to the carbon fibre technology too, so Oscar's 'advantage', if he has one, is athletic rather than technological. I'd argue he's a rare paralympic athlete performing at a sufficiently high level to compete with able-bodied peers, but that this by no means should exclude him from paralympic competition. Why's it have to be either/ or?
  8. Harper should go back to his evil layer (ASAP) from Canada writes: next up, bionic legs. i'm pretty slow so i guess it wouldn't give me a competitive advantage either, it'd just allow me to catch up to a level playing field.
  9. R Miller from Halifax, Canada writes: Rtab 2 from Canada:

    Well said!

    I also didn't understand the reasoning for the "either/or" ultimatum...

    Cheers.
  10. Globular Cluster from United States writes: If the able-bodied athletes also wore those carbon-fibre legs/feet, would they fly like the wind, do 100m in 7 seconds? If so, then let's up the ante, and allow these legs for everyone, as long as we're going down this slope.
  11. Matthew K from Halifax, Canada writes: So paralympians can now be in the paralympics and olympics, women can be on mens or womens teams. men on the other hand can only be on mens teams. wheres the equality...

    Whats next just 1 event with everyone competing all together? Men , women, disabled and abled...?

    Maybe the USA mens team will start playing in the womens league (equal rights eh) this might actually give them a chance at winning a title.
  12. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: This is a really dumb decision. This is not your grandmother's prosthetic leg we're talking about. This is not the clumsy, barely functional prosthesis that Terry Fox and Steve Fonyo used when running across the country. Prosthetic legs have become so advanced they are in some ways superior to real legs in terms of performance and efficiency of propulsion. The tensile alloys used are also extremely advanced. A man with these prosthetic limbs racing against others on natural legs is like racing wheelchairs against bicycles, or kayaks against row boats. It is a competition between TWO DIFFERENT MODES OF TRANSPORTATION, and thus is not a fair contest.
  13. L M87 from Calgary, Canada writes: Not only is it the prosthetic you need to test, you also need to test his oxygen consumption to make sure it's not off the charts versus the other guys. If he consumes less oxygen because he has less muscle usage, then it's not fair for everyone else.
  14. Another Opinion from Canada writes: For Rtab2: "Anecdotally speaking, I can't imagine that Pistorius' carbon fibre legs give any advantage over an able-bodied athlete, hard as that is for some to fathom."

    I have no problem with this decision. The (I thought) valid point made by an earlier poster is that, unlike human limbs, technology can be continually improved. How do you determine validity in performance?

    If better technology comes out, are next year's athletes allowed to use them? Able-bodied runners can't upgrade.

    Anyway, congrats to him for his achievement.
  15. Wasabi Jones from Canada writes: And I want to play in the Wimbledon Men's Finals this year. The only things holding me back are my burgeoning gut, poor eyesight and inability to compete with able-bodied ATP tennis players. I demand accommodation. It is my RIGHT!!
  16. R Miller from Halifax, Canada writes: Are some of you fricken joking ?

    You actually think that Pistorius has an unfair advantage because he is a double amputee?

    If so, all athletes are free to do what it takes to remain "competitive."

    Gawd almighty! You would think that Pistorius was shattering world records versus struggling to make the minimal qualifying time...

    Where do you find some of these posters, G&M?
  17. Garrett Deyne from Canada writes: Horrible idea. Even if he's a million times slower then his able bodied counter parts and is at a sever disadvantage he still shouldn't be allowed to race. It's like Alistair McLaughlin said its two different modes of transportation. If genetically I was given weak muscles and a slow metabolism thus making me fat and slow should I be allowed to compete against strong fit parapalegics because I'm at a disadvantage? Should short people be allowed to compete in the para-olympic high jump because thier at a disadvantage? I don't care how big his disadvantage is, this sport is seeing how fast you can run on legs, you don't have legs you can't compete.
  18. R Miller from Halifax, Canada writes: These stories about the Beijing Olympics and the response on these threads just keep getting more and more depressing ...

    Aren't the Olympics meant to be a celebration of the human spirit?

    I say, "Let this guy run!"

    It's decided now -- enough from the peanut gallery!

    Cheers.
  19. Canadian Abroad from London, United Kingdom writes: Well done for him!

    I can't believe people are using the term "fake legs". This man lost 2 legs and has made the most of it. He should be encouraged to suceed rather than put down by people who couldn't run a 400 nearly as fast with the full use of their legs. Even if they wanted to.

    Pandora's box? Call it discrimination if you don't allow him to compete. I hope he makes it, and beats as many people as possible.
  20. R C from Canada writes: If mechanical devices are an issue, then there should be no knee braces, taped wrists, etc. Few sports are totally 'pure' and it will always be a question of reasonable use of equipment. Black and white decision making doesn't have any place except classrooms and message boards.
  21. g h from Canada writes: R. Miller wrote: "Gawd almighty! You would think that Pistorius was shattering world records versus struggling to make the minimal qualifying time...

    Where do you find some of these posters, G&M? "

    You're not kidding. Many people seem to immediately go into some sort of involuntary(?) mental knee-jerk reaction: if someone else has been made better off in any way, then that means I've been made worse off in some way. And that's not fair! Wah...

    What I see is that this fellow has instantly become a hot attraction at track meets and will be able to command appearance money at meets, and make a few bucks. I suspect he's equal parts athlete and entrepreneur. Good for him.
  22. Joe S from Canada writes: Did anyone watch American Gladiators (Season Premier) this past week?
    There was an amputee in the competition and he poured his heart out during the final eliminator. He did come in last, but it was the fact that he completed it and had a chance to compete against "able-bodied" athletes. I think this is fantastic that even amputees are getting the chance to live and compete in a normal life!
  23. Kevin Dooley from Canada writes: The problem is that this is technology. Technology gets better with time. Even if Pistorius doesn't have an unfair advantage today using today's technology, one day soon it will give an unfair advantage. So the IAAF is now in the business of evaluating every new prosthetic appliance on the market. And, worse still, if the IAAF decides, based on its research, that a particular prosthesis does provide an unfair advantage, the CAS already has the precedent of being able to overturn these decisions.

    As a case in point of how athletic technology improves with time, the first wheelchair athletes to enter Marathons were real rugged pioneers who took hours to complete the course with bleeding hands. Today, when wheelchair athletes compete in Marathons, they always get to start just before the runners because they're about twice as fast and you know that the fastest runner in the world won't catch even the slowest wheelchair. Then they publish a set of wheelchair times and a separate set of running times.... because, as somebody else here so aptly put it, they're different modes of transportation.
  24. C C from Canada writes: Curiously, this news article left out the report of another South African amputee, Natalie Du Toit, who recent qualified for the Olympics in a new open water swimming event. Her time in the Olympic trials actually makes her a contender for the podium... and she's doing it without any prosthetic limbs/fins.

    Obviously swimming is a different beast than running, but it's interesting how neither the Court of Arbitration nor the media have referred to Du Toit's precedent, while examining the Pistorius case.
  25. R Miller from Halifax, Canada writes: IF the prosthetic technology EVER becomes more advanced to allow Pistorius a competitive advantage and Olympic athletes start to consider cutting off their own legs in order to benefit from this advantage then obviously, we have a problem that will need to be re-debated in the future....

    However, right now -- why not "Let this guy run?" He is an inspirational figure and we should admire both his courage and commitment.

    Cheers.
  26. Wally Grisold from Toronto, Canada writes: Just watch the South African relay team "Spring" into life. It looks as if the IOC does not have a leg to stand on if you get my drift.
  27. Dan P from Calgary, Canada writes: Another point - if runners are allowed to compete using purpose-designed prosthetics (his prosthetic legs were designed for sprinting, not general use), then I can't see how there's any debate over performance-enhancing drugs. Both represent ways to use technology to engineer the body to perform athletically - one mechanically, one chemically.

    You posters who are so scandalized by the critical responses here - would you feel the same way if it were a swimmer with prosthetic fins? They would blow the competition away, thus invalidating the whole concept of a swimming race. The comparison with marathon runners and wheelchair racers is a very good one. The only reason this is a debate at all is because Pistorius happens to be running times that are competitive with able-bodied runners. If his times were vastly slower, it wouldn't matter, and if they were vastly quicker, he never would have been allowed in the first place - because it would make a mockery of the whole exercise. Sport is only meaningful when the rules are very strictly defined, and it sounds like the definition of 'running' needs to be clarified a bit.
  28. Rick C from Canada writes: This decision will only lead to the inevitable reversal at some point in the future.

    The IAAF's study into Pisrtorius' blades concluded that 25% less energy is required to maintain top speed with the prosthetics compared to able bodied sprinters.

    The CAS claims the study was biased; which could be the case.

    Perhaps the current generation of blades Pisrtorius uses only provide a 5% advantage or perhaps it's even up.

    However the reality is that in short order the prosthetic blades will undoubtedly provide an advantage. Progression in materials and technology is rapid.
  29. Rick C from Canada writes: R Miller from Halifax, Canada writes: "IF the prosthetic technology EVER becomes more advanced to allow Pistorius a competitive advantage and Olympic athletes start to consider cutting off their own legs in order to benefit from this advantage then obviously, we have a problem that will need to be re-debated in the future...."

    The study conducted by the IAAF already indicates the prosthetic blades provide an advantage; 25% less energy to maintain top speeds.

    That is a considerable advantage. Of course without being involved with or completely auditing the test data one can't say for sure whether or not the testing was 100% accurate.

    However with the initial findings of a 25% advantage there is room for error and still end up with the blades providing an advantage.
  30. R. M. from Regina, Canada writes: I would rather see an institution like MIT take a close look at this. IMO it would be impossible to make prosthetics that would be identical to the human body's natural form so they have to be either superior or inferior. Given his performance to date I would "guess" they give him an advantage. Look at the design of the "feet" for example. They do not mimic the human body but rather invent a new paradigm. If I recall correctly the study looked at the knee mechanics but to me the main feature is the bottom of the device. I really do think it is a pandora's box but perhaps the best people to ask are the fellow competitors.
  31. Albin Forone from Canada writes: It's about a) qualifications and b) whether the prosthetic creates a physical advantage. This article brought out all kinds of dinosaurs re who can compete with whom - of course women should be allowed to compete with men if they are qualified at the Olympics level, and of course amputees should be allowed to compete with able-bodied if they are qualified without advantage by their prosthetics. I hope, but given IOC politics it is not absolutely certain, that it has been scientifically established that this runner's devices put him on a equal but no better level than his competitors. It's not altogether obviously true - maybe his artificial feet have to be calibrated or modified to establish that even field. But good gawd - we've seen Olympic sprinters run with different shoes and wind-reducing outfits, we've seen Olympic skaters compete with superior clap-skates against ordinary skates. The Olympics is a living tree of sports innovation and it has to be allowed to develop.
  32. comments closed again! fuck from Canada writes: he is sooooo cute! let him compete...
  33. andy c from Canada writes: i wonder if this indirectly clears up the speedo swimsuit issue? i'm sure the US swim team is happy with the ruling.
  34. R Miller from Halifax, Canada writes: Rick C from Canada:

    However, the Court of Arbitration for Sport has already ruled that there is no compelling evidence that Pistorius' Cheetah blades give him an unfair advantage so what's the problem?

    Judging by some of the above comments (not yours), I am wondering if Pistorius is possibly a modern day equivalent of Jesse Owens at the 1936 Berlin Olympics ?

    I also wonder if the terms "Aryan race superiority" and "able bodied athlete" aren't too far removed from one another as concepts ?

    If he wins a medal, will anyone have to shake his hand?

    BTW I would much rather see this guy run the 400 m than see Heather McCartney-Mills dance with the "stars."

    Cheers.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Top Stories by Section