Like Really Bro wrote:
People trying to argue its fairness are a special case of stupid. Sure, it's a free country and you can argue pretty much whatever you want (within reason), but this is one time that it makes you a total f'ing moron.
Last year at the state meet in Utah, a blade runner dude destroyed the state record by like 2 full seconds. He's apparently 5'9 or something normally, but with his blades, he's 6'5 easy. It wasn't even close. Literally no one had any chance at all as he continued to accelerate the last 200 meters.
But you are arguing that it is fair? How's that one work. There's like one blade runner in the state and several hundred 400 runners, and he just happens to be magnitudes more talented than all of them? Oh piss off idiot... of course it gives him an unfair advantage. Just like having male 800m runners compete against female 800m runners is completely idiotic. "Inspiring" my a$$. Get em off the track.
+1000000. The mind games going on to justify the blades as a disadvantage are unreal.
The world record on blades for 100m is something like 10.9 and for 200 it's 21.3 and 400 is 45.07.
These athletes cannot put power down to accelerate out of blocks like a sprinter with legs.
As the distance increases the advantages start to outweigh the disadvantages, but clearly 400m is not that distance or else we'd already have a guy running 42 on blades. Instead, Pistorious was far and away the best in the world and even he was simply an also ran at the Olympics, last in his semi.
You can still gain an unfair advantage if the blades take you from 52sec to 47sec. Not everyone who dopes sets the world record, but they still have an unfair advantage over people who don't dope.