Should Oscar Pistorius be allowed to run in the Olympics??

I can't wait to read from everyone b*%ching and moaning about him being let in. Great for the sport. Brings more interest. Why not let him run?

No, he's a freak that needs to compete with his own kind.

Should he? wrote:

Wouldn't it be considered an mechanical advantage to run with those bionic legs?!

He failed to meet South African Olympic standards, yet they decided to let him run.

It's a hard thing to consider. You don't want to deny someone the opportunity but yet, you don't know how much of an advantage they are. Those things can be tweaked at any time. No one can deny that if he won gold, the credit would attributed to his prosthetics, ability notwithstanding. At the end of the day, I don't think they should be allowed.

whynot55 wrote:

I can't wait to read from everyone b*%ching and moaning about him being let in. Great for the sport. Brings more interest. Why not let him run?

I agree.

They should also allow fat girls named Heather from TNT to run.

They won't interfere with the leaders and what does it hurt to have them in the race? It will bring interest from the average runners, raise funds for everyone's pet diseases, make money for sponsors and allow people to put some great fluff on their resumes!

Everyone wins!!!

This is not meant to sound mean, but here is the way I think of it.

Have you ever had tight calves that have prohibited you from training? Have your calves ever felt fatigued after a race? If you do too much training, do you get overuse injuries in your feet or shins? Oscar cannot have that happen to him, which gives him a potential advantage that others cannot reasonably attain. Additionally, his prostheses can be fine tuned for optimal performance, whereas we are "stuck" with the anatomy and tissue biomechanics we are born with.

I think Oscar is a great ambassador for the sport, has tremendous natural talent, and has probably put in a ton of work to get where he is. He also has some major disadvantages in having the disability he has since he was a child. I am indeed for inclusive sports and education. But it is not fair to overlook the advantages he has from a mechanics standpoint.

The media recently had a story about how he missed the qualifying requirement in his most recent race (after achieving the A standard one), by only a quarter of a second. So many people in the mainstream would think that is a petty issue, but that is like me saying I missed OT's by less than two seconds (for the 100m...) - it doesn't sound like much to non-track fans, but it really is. He is being held to a different standard, and that is fine for now, but where does one draw the line? What if he had achieved the B standard, but not the A - would SA petition for an exception for him?

I feel giving him special treatment just creates a very slippery slope...

Malamute wrote:

I feel giving him special treatment just creates a very slippery slope...

And a slippery slope would give a man with blades for legs an even bigger advantage.

if we are voting, I would vote no!

I don't understand the complaining on this board. Perhaps there is a small mechanical advantage, but the man has no feet people! If it were such a huge advantage why is he the only double amputee to even come close to the standards? The man has run 45.20 and deserves to run in the Olympics and represent his country. Every country actually has the right to set the standards they see fit for choosing their Olympic team, and Pistorius has run under the Olympic A standard.

Awesome wrote:

I don't understand the complaining on this board. Perhaps there is a small mechanical advantage, but the man has no feet people! If it were such a huge advantage why is he the only double amputee to even come close to the standards? The man has run 45.20 and deserves to run in the Olympics and represent his country. Every country actually has the right to set the standards they see fit for choosing their Olympic team, and Pistorius has run under the Olympic A standard.

He has full use of his quads, there is no way he is on the same level as other double amputees. Like that Army lady in the Olympics commercial--she has a real disability. Pistorius has an advantage.

If you were faster than him you wouldn't care. And yes he has quads, but so do many other double amputees, he is just better. Whether is is natural ability or hard work, he has achieved something almost all of us on this board wish we had. Good for you Oscar I will be rooting for you in London.

Should he? wrote:

He failed to meet South African Olympic standards, yet they decided to let him run.

What matters is that he met IOC standards.

He also met US standards.

The US doesn't tell someone to run the A standard twice.

Lomong would not meet South African Olypic standards but the US is naming him to their 5000 team.

The US will also let Manzano and Centro on the Olympic team even though they have not met the standard this year.

The IAAF has ruled that he can compete.

There are advantages and disadvantages to his situation.

Don't know if there is a net advantage but he is different.

Best to err on the side inclusion than exclusion.

They could always DQ him later like Ramzi.

No

I agree with you. It's not politically correct and you sound like a jerk when you say that he shouldn't be in. But, he doesn't have calves and ankles. He will not get as tired (potentially) through the rounds.

Imagine the old Soviet Union amputating legs to put these things on just to win medals? Seriously- I think it's wrong and opens up a huge can of worms.

I completely agree that his running is different.

And I understand why he technically should not be allowed to compete.

But I think it should be subjective and looked at it from a cost/benefit point of view.

The benefit of letting him run is that you allow a dedicated athlete to compete in a forum where he is looking for competitors at the same level. It's warm and fuzzy and makes the sport look compassionate.

The cost is pretty small. For South Africa no one gets bumped from the team because they didn't have three A standard athletes. At worst a number of athletes will slide down one position of they finish behind him. I have heard no noise form these athletes and they seem to welcome him. They can always run faster to avoid this.

He would not be the most villainous athlete to win Gold if it happened and the odds are pretty terrible that he will medal or make the final.

If it becomes an epidemic with other similar athletes you ban them like they did the fancy swimsuits.

On the other side, the benefit from banning him his pretty small.

You avoid "potential" controversy of a blade runner army.

The cost of banning him is that you look heartless.

I just think that if you let him run and he gets knocked out in the rounds it's a win-win.

The concept of people intentionally chopping off their feet for a medal chance is crazy.

And if some people are "lucky" enough to be footless and get great blades to beat footed people, then I guess they are just truly blessed and more fortunate then the rest of us.

I just do not think this will go much further than Oscar.

I really think that he is a good guy and has an incredible story but he should not be allowed. Athletics tests the limits of the human body and he has a clear mechanical advantage. His machined legs are not part of the human body and give him an unfair advantage. I realize that he uses them because of his birth defect but he is still using them to beat guys running with legs that they were born with. At what point would you draw the line? What if an able bodied person designed mechanisms that made them faster? It is just not fair for him to compete with them. Which is unfortunate because he really has inspired many.

As has already been pointed out, both on this thread and in the global media, if Oscar gained a significant advantage above that of his natural ability, due to the use of artifical limbs, then why are there not other athletes with the same artifical limbs performing at the same level as Oscar ? Not even 1 of the thousands who must be out there competing ? Not every Jamaican is capable of running 100m under 9.6 seconds (despite it looking like that at times). But if 1 can, then why aren't they all ? Freaks of nature happen. Until I see some evidence that tells me without question that Oscar with artifical limbs is faster than the same Oscar with complete natural legs, then it's all just gossip mongering and sour grapes.

He should be able to run in the Olympics or in the Paraolympics but not both. It is a farce that he is going to be racing in both.

KiwiG wrote:

As has already been pointed out, both on this thread and in the global media, if Oscar gained a significant advantage above that of his natural ability, due to the use of artifical limbs, then why are there not other athletes with the same artifical limbs performing at the same level as Oscar ? Not even 1 of the thousands who must be out there competing ? Not every Jamaican is capable of running 100m under 9.6 seconds (despite it looking like that at times). But if 1 can, then why aren't they all ? Freaks of nature happen. Until I see some evidence that tells me without question that Oscar with artifical limbs is faster than the same Oscar with complete natural legs, then it's all just gossip mongering and sour grapes.

I think the biggest concern would be with any precedent it sets for the future. It's not necessarily a Pistorius issue.

Awesome wrote:

I don't understand the complaining on this board. Perhaps there is a small mechanical advantage, but the man has no feet people! If it were such a huge advantage why is he the only double amputee to even come close to the standards? The man has run 45.20 and deserves to run in the Olympics and represent his country. Every country actually has the right to set the standards they see fit for choosing their Olympic team, and Pistorius has run under the Olympic A standard.

Consider the population of double amputees (only below the knee) relative to the population of non-amputees.

Think. Please think.