Pistorius "inconvenient embarrassment" Pissed at BBC

Kick him out again. He's a sorry piece of shit. A total joke and a cherater. A pathetic cripple. He'll be dead early anyways.

He is not inspirational at all. This is a big embarrassment to Track and Field.

HOoooooooly Shiz, the guy in the black shirt made this look SO MUCH DAMN FUN, I'd order a pair! And the guy in the blue shirt, I was half expecting him to either jump OFF the top of that building to get a higher air or just get a bouncing start to reach the roof WOW!!

please stop hijacking threads and talking about cool pogo stick shoes. thanks.

ROJO,

Don't call Pistorius an inspiration unless he actually inspires you to do or think something - and right now the only thing he seems to inspire you to do is to comment on how he shouldn't be running in championship meets.

In what other ways does he inspire you? Does he make you want to take advantage of your own legs in ways you haven't been lately? Does he make you want to go out and support the Paralympic movement - maybe make some donations of blades to amputees in other countries without access to quality medical care or rehabilitation, so they can start training and provide Oscar with an acceptable level of competition?

Well, it is the BBC.

But he should have stood firm and not walked out. He is better than that.

He doesn't need to apologize to them or anyone.

Doesn't the paralympics have a category for his condition?

gghgh wrote:

Doesn't the paralympics have a category for his condition?

Since running with the blades is completely identical in every way to running with legs, shouldn't able bodied sprinters be allowed to compete in the paralympics?

There would be no honor in beating disabled runners, so I don't think anyone would want to do that. Plus I don't think it is identical in every way.

wi|fredo wrote:

gghgh wrote:

Doesn't the paralympics have a category for his condition?

Since running with the blades is completely identical in every way to running with legs, shouldn't able bodied sprinters be allowed to compete in the paralympics?

I think it may turn out to be an embarrassment to the process that saw his cleared at CAS based on what was clearly incomplete research and not peer-reviewed, and in fact not even representative of the scientific research team's opinion on the matter. It seems clear now, 3 years later, that Hugh Herr and the legal team manipulated that science to have him cleared. THat's an embarrassment, for sure. And maybe we will regret it one day - I'm with you in saying he shouldn't be running. But I still can't see that it's an embarrassment. Regret, maybe. Embarrassment is a bit strong.

Thanks for the links, I'll check them out later.

Just quickly regarding the mechanics, this was done extensively by Bruggemann in the first round of testing in Germany in late 2007. Interestingly, when Pistorius and Herr went to CAS, they didn't challenge these findings and nor did they repeat the testing, and so I would take that as approval that Bruggemann's numbers are accurate. Briefly, he found that human tendons returned 59% of the energy stored, whereas the carbon fiber blades returned 92%. So that's a 41% LOSS compared to an 8% loss, pretty substantial differences.

There was some dispute at the CAS hearing about this discrepancy, because Herr and Kram argued that the energy might not be lost, but rather transferred across the joint. In any event, there's more on this here:

http://www.sportsscientists.com/2011/08/scientific-interpretation-of-oscar.html

Re advances in technology, Pistorius and Herr have said repeatedly that the blades haven't changed in 15 years (Pistorius has occasionally said 7 as well). The problem is, in 2007, Wired Magazine went with Pistorius to write a big feature on him, and the focus was the unveiling of a new prototype Cheetah, and so it's quite clear that the companies are developing new equipment all the time. I know a few Paralympians, single leg amputees, and they're testing on an annual basis to find the best new blade, a change in shape, and change in stiffness etc. So the claim that the blades haven't changed is a flat lie, which is the most infuriating part of the whole thing because these statements are rarely challenged by anyone. If they did, it would be obvious.

Will check those links, thanks!

Ross

The wimp belongs in a circus with twelve fingered lady, Caster Semenya, Lance Armstrong, and other dopers and freaks.

A big part of the purpose of doing an interview is to respond to criticism and explain to people why they should be on your side. Sounds like this question gave him an opportunity to do just that. Why even show up to the interview in the first place if you aren't going to take said opportunity?

I think Pistorius only got mad because he misunderstood what the reporter was saying. Oscar seemed to think the reporter was accusing him of being an embarrassment in the sense that he reflects badly on athletics. Maybe because the nature of his participation is deemed in some sense inappropriate, or because for some reason Oscar is to be looked down upon. However, I don't think the reporter was trying to say this at all. Rather, he was suggesting that Oscar is an embarrassment to athletics in the sense that he challenges certain assumptions, for example assumptions about what champion athletes are supposed to look like and who is eligible to compete. It is inconvenient and embarrassing to be confronted with questions that you'd rather sweep under the rug. (This interpretation of his remarks, btw, is strongly supported by the immediately subsequent context, "...taking them into uncharted ethical waters".) This is far from insulting, if anything it's a testament to the barriers Oscar has had to overcome to achieve what he has.

IAAF wants to create an image of fairness and egalitarianism, a "level playing field" where anyone (with enough hard, consistent work) can succeed. But they're faced with a serious dilemma, because everyone is advantaged or disadvantaged to some degree. For example, I run twice most days and train just about as hard as I can, but I'll probably never even break 14:00 in the 5k let alone make the Olympics. I'm not saying you should ban Rudisha because his stride is too smooth and perfect - obviously not. But the unfortunate fact is that boundaries are never clear and there is no good place to draw the line. You should DQ Rosie for taking the subway, and leave Rudisha alone, but what about Oscar? Boundary cases, such as possible advantages from secondary sexual characteristics or from mechanical appendages, serve to highlight the major problem with athletics today, the same problem raised by doping: The "level playing field" is a myth. And there's no good solution. I'd say if you're IAAF, and your whole empire is predicated upon this construct, then the discussion that Oscar sparks is certainly both inconvenient and embarrassing.

I would also add that while I'd typically consider it somewhat immature to storm out of an interview like this, as some people have suggested, I'd say it's certainly more than fair for Oscar to have a bit of a chip on his shoulder.