What do you think about runners with prosthetics? Is there an advantage in terms of performance?
I watched AJ Digby run at Nats last weekend, definitely seemed tough for others to pass him at least.
What do you think about runners with prosthetics? Is there an advantage in terms of performance?
I watched AJ Digby run at Nats last weekend, definitely seemed tough for others to pass him at least.
DTree wrote:
What do you think about runners with prosthetics? Is there an advantage in terms of performance?
I watched AJ Digby run at Nats last weekend, definitely seemed tough for others to pass him at least.
Yeah not having part of your legs is a total advantage in sports...... Sarcasm
Jackass ignorant remark. Having blades is a huge advantage. Digby is a fat guy running 45-47 second 400s. Have you seen him "run"? He's fat...and easily beats the fields due to the blade advantage. If a kid like this was deciding D1 national meet results, then maybe you'd see new legislation.
Coachin5656 wrote:
Jackass ignorant remark. Having blades is a huge advantage. Digby is a fat guy running 45-47 second 400s. Have you seen him "run"? He's fat...and easily beats the fields due to the blade advantage. If a kid like this was deciding D1 national meet results, then maybe you'd see new legislation.
You are wrong, sir.
His PR is 48 and some change, so why lie unless you only want to tear the man down for being a good runner despite his disability.
Are you an amputee? What exactly are your credentials to pass such judgement? You don't even mentioned the difference between bilateral and unilateral, AKs vs BKs or others. All the same?
Name one WR by an amputee runner that is faster than the abled body runners. Just one.
As an amputee runner for nearly a decade and a mediocre runner all my life, I can tell you from experience there is zero advantage. There is zero power produced by a prosthesis, you do mitigate some of the energy loss but there is no muscle to produce power. I personally found approx. a 25 to 33% reduction in times at best. The more miles you put in the higher chance for issues like skin infections and abrasions that will prevent any training in a prosthesis at all.
A prosthesis is effectively a highly insulated thermos, cooking the leg and raising your core temperature especially in distances. I have a thick liner next to my skin, an inner sleeve, prosthetic socks for fit, then the outer socket. It is dead weight that is lifted mostly by the hip. Also a unilateral runner does not have a normal gait and the body has to compensate for that as well.
The scientist who claimed Pistoriu had an advantage also claimed he had no advantage, said he had up to a 10s advantage in the 400 then changed that to a 5s advantage, huge inaccuracies that illuminated their junk science for recognition on this idiotic subject. You think Bolt on prostheses would run sub 9 or come close to his WR? Madness to think so even with complete disregard to common sense. You really need to be around paralympians or disabled runners to get a clue.
Maybe train a bit harder so you don't need this excuse when passed by someone lacking anatomical limbs who never gave up.
Yeah, this is a sore spot with me especially with people who know next to nothing yet want to be consider experts. Just no.
Disabled Prejudice
Stop it. Of course its an advantage over the 400. No one would choose it of course, but the carbon blades are an upgrade on calf muscles and shoes.
I'm 64 now and I ran 46 seconds in the day. I can barely walk now. If had my myself fitted for blades I am pretty certain I'd run 45 seconds. The PR I wanted.
This is all physics and geometry. I'm sorry you are disabled, but get real.
sillymanawar wrote:
This is all physics and geometry. I'm sorry you are disabled, but get real.
Bullsh*t. You might notice flesh and bone are not in your calculated response. Again, THERE ARE NO WR TIMES BY AMPUTEES THAT ARE FASTER THAN THE ABLED BODIED ATHLETES.
Zero, None. Zilch. Nada. Maybe if the runner had no legs at all then they would be even faster. Oh wait.
And I don't need your sympathy. I am not imagining what is real. Thinking something and doing something are very, very different things. In reality that is. You have no clue sir, none at all.
Your straw man had no legs.
If you want to buy blade runners just add Cryptotab to chrome and you can use the money from that to buy them.
It takes metal much longer to get tired than human flesh. Prosthetic legs are impervious to oxygen debt, lactic acid, etc.
Advantages: prosthetics don't get tired, you can be any height
Disadvantages: slower starts, hard to run on the inside of a turn
I think that the advantages slightly outweigh the disadvantages. There aren't many blade runners, but it seems like a lot of them are still really fast so that shows that there is a correlation
Jayordon wrote:
Advantages: prosthetics don't get tired, you can be any height
Disadvantages: slower starts, hard to run on the inside of a turn
I think that the advantages slightly outweigh the disadvantages. There aren't many blade runners, but it seems like a lot of them are still really fast so that shows that there is a correlation
Also a (major) disadvantage: BLADE PROSTHETICS CAN'T PRODUCE POWER LIKE CALF MUSCLES DO.
Disabled Prejudice is correct in all phases of this silly thread.
The ONLY advantage(?) I have been able to find is bilateral amps can gain height (longer levers) that would seem to benefit sprinters. That quickly gets erased due to slow starts and down track gait issues.
It’s plausible that blades provide some small net advantage. Of course, the talent pool of “blade runners” is very, very small, so even if there is a small advantage, one wouldn’t really expect world-beating times to emerge. Because of this fact, it is entirely ridiculous to present lack of world records as evidence of no advantage. However, for the same reason, there’s really no need to worry about this issue. It’s such a small number of athletes, and it in no way negatively impacts the sport as a whole.
sillymanawar wrote:
Disabled Prejudice
Stop it. Of course its an advantage over the 400.........
I'm 64 now and I ran 46 seconds in the day. I can barely walk now. If had my myself fitted for blades I am pretty certain I'd run 45 seconds. The PR I wanted.
This is all physics and geometry. I'm sorry you are disabled, but get real.
Lol it's sounds like your just salty you never ran 45 and your making excuses. And how you can say it's physics when you don't event mention all the power your calves generate each step of the race, not just the start. This is like saying a smaller car engine is better because it weighs less. Well duhh, obviously it weighs less but you have to factor the loss of horsepower and torque.
Para Coach guy wrote:
The ONLY advantage(?) I have been able to find is bilateral amps can gain height (longer levers) that would seem to benefit sprinters. That quickly gets erased due to slow starts and down track gait issues.
Thanks for bringing some real insight here.
I think the longer levers may give the distance runners some advantage in their longer gaits and why this needs to be closely monitored. Some have certainly increased their height via longer legs, while a unilateral cannot do this.
As long as the turnover is the same, the longer legs are a clear advantage for bilats over unilats. At what point the added energy expenditure offset the greater gait? Quite a few bilats seem to run tall.
Interesting "Jump 5ft High, Run 25 MPH.
Letsrun should get a pair of GT Cobras and the Kangaroo Jumps to do an unscientific study.
(See below)
Is there an advantage? Of course there is an advantage.
Blades have no metabolic cost. (They do not use oxygen, do not require blood,
Blades do not produce lactic acid.
Blades do not fatigue.
Blades do not get injured. (They are simply replaced)
Blades do not weight the same as a human leg/foot assembly.
Blades only store and return the energy put into them - leg muscles must generate force.
Blades do not strain (leg muscles must generate force).
Yes there is "blade bias" it makes for a compelling story, and "people want to believe". It is no different than wheelchair racers - it is more efficient to roll/coast/draft than it is to run. Why don't cycling races have wheelchair divisions. No disrespect on anyone, but this is apples and oranges.
GT Cobra
5.0 out of 5 stars 1 customer review
Note: This item is only available from third-party sellers (see all offers).
Available from these sellers.
Size: 110-154lbs (Raptor)
Comes Standard with Cobra Cuff
Spring is 15% more responsive
Jump 5 Ft High, Run 25 MPH
Forgive me ^WEIGH ... not weight.
Qwertino wrote:
It’s plausible that blades provide some small net advantage. Of course, the talent pool of “blade runners” is very, very small, so even if there is a small advantage, one wouldn’t really expect world-beating times to emerge. Because of this fact, it is entirely ridiculous to present lack of world records as evidence of no advantage. However, for the same reason, there’s really no need to worry about this issue. It’s such a small number of athletes, and it in no way negatively impacts the sport as a whole.
Even a mediocre runner given a 10s headstart over 400m is likely to demolish a field of world class runners. Going from 53 to 43s easy on prosthetic legs? You are a fool to think so.
You, who have no freaking clue what it is to run on prosthetic legs, tell ME who has done both, that I don't know what I am talking about yet you do?
Ridiculous? Yeah, I'll have what you are smoking.
I had hoped that running without the pain I experienced (something like someone hitting your ankle with a baseball bat) that I could approach my abled-bodied times, maybe even run faster without that discomfort. No, not even close. But being able to run is one of the most beautifully moving things we can do as a physical human being and as long as I can do it I will.
Don't tell me what I know because you have no idea. None.
Done here.
Disabled Prejudice wrote:
Qwertino wrote:
It’s plausible that blades provide some small net advantage. Of course, the talent pool of “blade runners” is very, very small, so even if there is a small advantage, one wouldn’t really expect world-beating times to emerge. Because of this fact, it is entirely ridiculous to present lack of world records as evidence of no advantage. However, for the same reason, there’s really no need to worry about this issue. It’s such a small number of athletes, and it in no way negatively impacts the sport as a whole.
Even a mediocre runner given a 10s headstart over 400m is likely to demolish a field of world class runners. Going from 53 to 43s easy on prosthetic legs? You are a fool to think so.
You, who have no freaking clue what it is to run on prosthetic legs, tell ME who has done both, that I don't know what I am talking about yet you do?
Ridiculous? Yeah, I'll have what you are smoking.
I had hoped that running without the pain I experienced (something like someone hitting your ankle with a baseball bat) that I could approach my abled-bodied times, maybe even run faster without that discomfort. No, not even close. But being able to run is one of the most beautifully moving things we can do as a physical human being and as long as I can do it I will.
Don't tell me what I know because you have no idea. None.
Done here.
Congratulations. Every single thing that you claim I said is something I didn’t even come close to saying. I think that may be a first even for Letsrun. Clearly you’re very sensitive about this, and you’re letting wild emotions get the best of you. Probably best for you to avoid discussing this.