The Bladerunner
August 28, 2011 8:44 PM Subscribe
Oscar Pistorius -- known as "the blade runner" -- has qualified for the second round of the world 400 meter championship.
Why is that noteworthy? He's missing both legs from below the knee.
Why is that noteworthy? He's missing both legs from below the knee.
You know, I've seen a lot about the merits of this guy competing, whether the technology give him an unfair advantage or not. But one nice thing about the video was that there was at least perfunctory exchange of congratulations b/w him and the other competitors. It's nice to conceive of the possibility that he could be accepted that way.
posted by Clyde Mnestra at 8:53 PM on August 28, 2011
posted by Clyde Mnestra at 8:53 PM on August 28, 2011
Don't know, I don't know such stuff. I just do legs, ju-, ju-, just legs... just prosthetic design, just legs. You Nexus, huh? I design your legs.
posted by loquacious at 8:56 PM on August 28, 2011 [13 favorites]
posted by loquacious at 8:56 PM on August 28, 2011 [13 favorites]
YES! This makes me so happy to hear! So glad they are letting him participate.
posted by strixus at 9:01 PM on August 28, 2011
posted by strixus at 9:01 PM on August 28, 2011
Performance-enhancing drugs are banned. Performance-enhancing legs are welcome!
I don't think this makes sense while we have the Paralympics. Any athlete beaten by Pistorius will feel, to a certain extent, cheated.
posted by East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94 at 9:03 PM on August 28, 2011 [3 favorites]
I don't think this makes sense while we have the Paralympics. Any athlete beaten by Pistorius will feel, to a certain extent, cheated.
posted by East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94 at 9:03 PM on August 28, 2011 [3 favorites]
Amazingly enough it is an unfair advantage, if barely. Running is a system of energy storage through sprung force and rebound. This is why you can't run if your tendons are screwed up or cut, how kangaroos hop, etc.
And those blades are amazing energy-stores and springs.
He's still possibly expending more effort, suffering more pain to run that fast on the blades. He's also probably doing more mental processing to deal with not being able to truly feel the ground and get reliable balance feedback.
It's a tough question, though. Is he allowed to compete with mechanical assistance because he's an amputee? If you put "blades" on a non-amputee, the difference would be tremendous.
And where do you draw the line, if any? What if someone had more lower leg, or a partial foot, and a system of blades? How do you decide what's equivalent to the real thing?
And if you react to this too much and make too many rules about what it means to be human - you end up with Vonnegut's Harrison Bergeron.
Me? I say bring on the transgressive bio-engineering and self-powered engineered augmentation. I like the idea of augmentation and science and enhancement in sports. I like the idea of 100 foot pole vaults and three second 100 meter dashes. I like idea of pushing the limits of performance and health. I think banning doping in sports instead of practicing knowledge and harm reduction is as regressive as the drug war. People used to drink wine on the Tour de France. I think in sports it would be somewhat self-correcting. Healthy is performance, etc.
posted by loquacious at 9:09 PM on August 28, 2011 [6 favorites]
And those blades are amazing energy-stores and springs.
He's still possibly expending more effort, suffering more pain to run that fast on the blades. He's also probably doing more mental processing to deal with not being able to truly feel the ground and get reliable balance feedback.
It's a tough question, though. Is he allowed to compete with mechanical assistance because he's an amputee? If you put "blades" on a non-amputee, the difference would be tremendous.
And where do you draw the line, if any? What if someone had more lower leg, or a partial foot, and a system of blades? How do you decide what's equivalent to the real thing?
And if you react to this too much and make too many rules about what it means to be human - you end up with Vonnegut's Harrison Bergeron.
Me? I say bring on the transgressive bio-engineering and self-powered engineered augmentation. I like the idea of augmentation and science and enhancement in sports. I like the idea of 100 foot pole vaults and three second 100 meter dashes. I like idea of pushing the limits of performance and health. I think banning doping in sports instead of practicing knowledge and harm reduction is as regressive as the drug war. People used to drink wine on the Tour de France. I think in sports it would be somewhat self-correcting. Healthy is performance, etc.
posted by loquacious at 9:09 PM on August 28, 2011 [6 favorites]
Guy who kicked the longest field goal in regular season NFL history had half a foot. Wore a special shoe. You don't see anyone complaining about that. I love sports. So what if he gains a minute advantage? Its fucking inspiring. That's what sports should be. Inspiring.
posted by nathancaswell at 9:14 PM on August 28, 2011 [6 favorites]
posted by nathancaswell at 9:14 PM on August 28, 2011 [6 favorites]
But one nice thing about the video was that there was at least perfunctory exchange of congratulations b/w him and the other competitors.
Why not? You can admire Pistorius without agreeing that he competes on a level basis.
Any athlete beaten by Pistorius will feel, to a certain extent, cheated.
But still walk away thinking, "I'd rather have my real feet." I don't think any non-disabled athlete is gonna feel "cheated" by Oscar Pistorius.
I think he should be allowed to compete if for no other reason than he can compete. Of course every record and every competition he wins will be followed by the BIG ASTERISK: OMG! HE'S MISSING BOTH LEGS FROM BELOW THE KNEE.
When you have two or more "bladerunners" then it gets tricky, but for the moment Pistorius is unique and should not only be allowed, but embraced, in competition.
"Man has made his match... Now it's his problem."
posted by three blind mice at 9:20 PM on August 28, 2011
Why not? You can admire Pistorius without agreeing that he competes on a level basis.
Any athlete beaten by Pistorius will feel, to a certain extent, cheated.
But still walk away thinking, "I'd rather have my real feet." I don't think any non-disabled athlete is gonna feel "cheated" by Oscar Pistorius.
I think he should be allowed to compete if for no other reason than he can compete. Of course every record and every competition he wins will be followed by the BIG ASTERISK: OMG! HE'S MISSING BOTH LEGS FROM BELOW THE KNEE.
When you have two or more "bladerunners" then it gets tricky, but for the moment Pistorius is unique and should not only be allowed, but embraced, in competition.
"Man has made his match... Now it's his problem."
posted by three blind mice at 9:20 PM on August 28, 2011
Great step forward for augmented humans. Sign me up for some bladerunner legs and a borg eye or something.
posted by Ad hominem at 9:24 PM on August 28, 2011
posted by Ad hominem at 9:24 PM on August 28, 2011
Let him run and win. Some othe athlete wants to cut their own legs off to catch up, that fine by me. I doubt they will take him up on it.
posted by humanfont at 9:27 PM on August 28, 2011 [1 favorite]
posted by humanfont at 9:27 PM on August 28, 2011 [1 favorite]
Wow. So this is what will happen to me, when they cut my legs off? Maybe all that walking, to keep the blood flowing, is a waste of time. I could be an Olympian, instead!
posted by Goofyy at 9:32 PM on August 28, 2011
posted by Goofyy at 9:32 PM on August 28, 2011
Yeah, I think I saw this before, in an old Judge Dredd comic. If I recall correctly, the Justice Department ruled that augmented athletes could compete as humans as long as the brain was fully human tissue. Other than offensive weaponry, anything was permitted.
posted by charlie don't surf at 9:33 PM on August 28, 2011
posted by charlie don't surf at 9:33 PM on August 28, 2011
charlie don't surf: "Yeah, I think I saw this before, in an old Judge Dredd comic. If I recall correctly, the Justice Department ruled that augmented athletes could compete as humans as long as the brain was fully human tissue. Other than offensive weaponry, anything was permitted"
Yeah, I agree, we should reserve the offensive weaponry-augmented athletes for the Paralympics.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 9:54 PM on August 28, 2011 [1 favorite]
Yeah, I agree, we should reserve the offensive weaponry-augmented athletes for the Paralympics.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 9:54 PM on August 28, 2011 [1 favorite]
He's an incredible guy, but there's no way he should be allowed to compete with able bodied athletes.
posted by joannemullen at 9:54 PM on August 28, 2011
posted by joannemullen at 9:54 PM on August 28, 2011
But how can he handle a portal gun?
posted by dirigibleman at 10:06 PM on August 28, 2011 [10 favorites]
posted by dirigibleman at 10:06 PM on August 28, 2011 [10 favorites]
If the race is about finding out who has the healthiest body and best running skills, and an ordinary runner could have his legs removed and replaced with these blades and be able to run faster than before as a result, then the legs are an unfair mechanical advantage and should not be permitted.
The alternative is to have a competition to find out who has the healthiest body, best running skills, and most skilled engineers.
posted by rifflesby at 10:09 PM on August 28, 2011 [2 favorites]
The alternative is to have a competition to find out who has the healthiest body, best running skills, and most skilled engineers.
posted by rifflesby at 10:09 PM on August 28, 2011 [2 favorites]
Let him run and win. Some othe athlete wants to cut their own legs off to catch up, that fine by me. I doubt they will take him up on it.
Do you believe that wheelchair athletes should be able to compete along with able-bodied athletes too? Because, if so, the marathon world record is about to be dropped by over half an hour. And hey, if we are going to allow wheels, why not allow roller blades?
Oscar Pistorius is very impressive, but he's competing in a different event. The only reason we have having this discussion is because the time he's running is close to that of the elite athletes and people think that that means something. If he were running 50 seconds for the 400m then no one would care and if he were running 40 seconds then everyone would know that he has a mechanical advantage. It's because he's running 45 seconds that people assume that he is doing the same thing that able bodied athletes are doing. He's not.
posted by It's Never Lurgi at 10:11 PM on August 28, 2011 [26 favorites]
Do you believe that wheelchair athletes should be able to compete along with able-bodied athletes too? Because, if so, the marathon world record is about to be dropped by over half an hour. And hey, if we are going to allow wheels, why not allow roller blades?
Oscar Pistorius is very impressive, but he's competing in a different event. The only reason we have having this discussion is because the time he's running is close to that of the elite athletes and people think that that means something. If he were running 50 seconds for the 400m then no one would care and if he were running 40 seconds then everyone would know that he has a mechanical advantage. It's because he's running 45 seconds that people assume that he is doing the same thing that able bodied athletes are doing. He's not.
posted by It's Never Lurgi at 10:11 PM on August 28, 2011 [26 favorites]
But how can he handle a portal gun?
Where are we going? Are you coming back? What's that noise? Is that a gun? Do you smell something burning? Ooooohh... what's in heeeere?
posted by Celsius1414 at 10:12 PM on August 28, 2011
Where are we going? Are you coming back? What's that noise? Is that a gun? Do you smell something burning? Ooooohh... what's in heeeere?
posted by Celsius1414 at 10:12 PM on August 28, 2011
If we have a math contest and one guy gets to use a calculator....
If we have a triva contest and one guy gets to use google...
I think the reason it doesnt bother most people is because they arent the one losing the race...
This guy is awesome. But, his running is mechanically assisted.
Next iteration, somebody will be winning weight lifting contests with an exoskeleton but he will be allowed to because he has a bad back. good grief.
posted by jcworth at 10:20 PM on August 28, 2011
If we have a triva contest and one guy gets to use google...
I think the reason it doesnt bother most people is because they arent the one losing the race...
This guy is awesome. But, his running is mechanically assisted.
Next iteration, somebody will be winning weight lifting contests with an exoskeleton but he will be allowed to because he has a bad back. good grief.
posted by jcworth at 10:20 PM on August 28, 2011
I think we can put everyone on a continuum of cyborgness:
- 0% machine, 100% human
- Some % artificial parts/assistance (contact lenses, advanced swimsuits, advanced bicycles, blade-running etc.)
- 100% machine, 0% human
We, in general, have no problems with competitions at either end of the spectrum. But the stuff in between, which most sport today really is, causes varying degrees of discomfort to people.
There are swimsuits that, everything else being equal, improve your timing. There is so much lightweight protective gear available in, say, Cricket, that it allows modern era batsmen to play shots that batsmen even 20 years ago wouldn't have dared to try. Ditto for surfboards, tennis rackets, and whatever else you can think of. Given the costs involved, a lot of playing fields across a variety of sports are not level for competitors at all.
This debate goes right to the heart of not only what it means to be human, but also what sport means to us and our ideas about fairness and justice. All of us seem to have some personal uncanny valleys of sportsmanship that some sportspersons will never be able to cross. For me, personally, the bladerunner fails the test of level playing field, but his is an inspiring story, and I think we can all agree on that at least.
posted by vidur at 10:24 PM on August 28, 2011 [3 favorites]
- 0% machine, 100% human
- Some % artificial parts/assistance (contact lenses, advanced swimsuits, advanced bicycles, blade-running etc.)
- 100% machine, 0% human
We, in general, have no problems with competitions at either end of the spectrum. But the stuff in between, which most sport today really is, causes varying degrees of discomfort to people.
There are swimsuits that, everything else being equal, improve your timing. There is so much lightweight protective gear available in, say, Cricket, that it allows modern era batsmen to play shots that batsmen even 20 years ago wouldn't have dared to try. Ditto for surfboards, tennis rackets, and whatever else you can think of. Given the costs involved, a lot of playing fields across a variety of sports are not level for competitors at all.
This debate goes right to the heart of not only what it means to be human, but also what sport means to us and our ideas about fairness and justice. All of us seem to have some personal uncanny valleys of sportsmanship that some sportspersons will never be able to cross. For me, personally, the bladerunner fails the test of level playing field, but his is an inspiring story, and I think we can all agree on that at least.
posted by vidur at 10:24 PM on August 28, 2011 [3 favorites]
Jcworth: there are many math competitions where calculators are allowed for participants. These are invariably concerned with the meat of problem-solving, which is the creation of proofs.
And just go ahead and try using Google to aid you on a high-level trivia contest. You won't be able to keep up, even with an instantaneous connection to the Internet.
I just think that these sports will end up diverging until this sort of cybernetics is an everyday thing and we have new generations whose bases of comparison are different.
posted by curuinor at 10:30 PM on August 28, 2011
And just go ahead and try using Google to aid you on a high-level trivia contest. You won't be able to keep up, even with an instantaneous connection to the Internet.
I just think that these sports will end up diverging until this sort of cybernetics is an everyday thing and we have new generations whose bases of comparison are different.
posted by curuinor at 10:30 PM on August 28, 2011
What if instead of "disabled" we called him "underprivileged"? And those blades are a form of affirmative action intended to make up for decades of athletic discrimination against people without feet? Would it be OK then for him to compete?
Or is OK to discriminate against "differently abled" people?
posted by three blind mice at 10:51 PM on August 28, 2011
Or is OK to discriminate against "differently abled" people?
posted by three blind mice at 10:51 PM on August 28, 2011
this article seems to suggest that except for oxygen consumption, which was closer to distance runners than 400m sprinters. If anything it seems that the fake legs aren't as springy as real legs, which would be the thing to look at for me.
if the 400m field at the paralympics were all around the level of this guy then i'd say it was clear that the fake legs are an advantage, but that's not the case. Pistorius crushes the other runners on fake legs. I think he's worked his ass off and deserves to compete with other athletes who are on the same level.
posted by mexican at 10:52 PM on August 28, 2011 [2 favorites]
if the 400m field at the paralympics were all around the level of this guy then i'd say it was clear that the fake legs are an advantage, but that's not the case. Pistorius crushes the other runners on fake legs. I think he's worked his ass off and deserves to compete with other athletes who are on the same level.
posted by mexican at 10:52 PM on August 28, 2011 [2 favorites]
I am not a physiologist, materials scientist or doctor, but I, with no real evidence to back it up, posit that this guy is at a disadvantage. Anyone have any facts to back me up? The human leg has evolved over millennia to have great energy storage and return characteristics. I doubt two pieces of carbon fiber can beat them.
There is no real good place to draw the line, Tiger Woods has had eye surgery, many pitchers have had ulnar collateral ligament surgery, athletes have pins and metal rods of all types.
posted by Ad hominem at 10:53 PM on August 28, 2011
There is no real good place to draw the line, Tiger Woods has had eye surgery, many pitchers have had ulnar collateral ligament surgery, athletes have pins and metal rods of all types.
posted by Ad hominem at 10:53 PM on August 28, 2011
@vidur Out of your examples, only contacts are body augmentation, bicycles and swimming trunks are sporting equipment. People generally have the same access to the same level of equipment within a particular level of a sport, and certainly they do at the top levels. Further, the governing body of a particular sporting level has regulations regarding all equipment. Regarding contacts/glasses, it is simple: allow anyone to wear them if they choose.
posted by rob paxon at 10:58 PM on August 28, 2011
posted by rob paxon at 10:58 PM on August 28, 2011
curuinor: Have played a fair bit of trivia in my life, being able to use an internet connection would have won me a vast majority of contests which I lost. Most of the time the problem wasn't that I didn't know the answer, but rather couldn't remember the name of an actor or character, or something to that effect, a problem that could usually have been solved by the first page of a google or wikipedia search.
As for Oscar Pistorius, I agree with those who say that he's playing a different game. If, say, his prosthesis was such that it was shaped like, had the physical properties of, and moved like a regular human leg, and he was achieving competitive times on something like that, I might feel differently. But his prosthesis is a device designed for running efficiently to the limits of our design and materials capabilities. While it could be said that the other runners have the "choice" of replacing their own legs, it's a rather absurd one.
mexican's point is a valid one, though. If he's not the only one with this technology, but the only one running at this level, then maybe it makes more sense to let him compete against people who do as well. Maybe we should invert It's Never Lurgi's point. He ought to compete against able-bodied athletes precisely because he is achieving comparable speeds.
posted by cthuljew at 10:58 PM on August 28, 2011
As for Oscar Pistorius, I agree with those who say that he's playing a different game. If, say, his prosthesis was such that it was shaped like, had the physical properties of, and moved like a regular human leg, and he was achieving competitive times on something like that, I might feel differently. But his prosthesis is a device designed for running efficiently to the limits of our design and materials capabilities. While it could be said that the other runners have the "choice" of replacing their own legs, it's a rather absurd one.
mexican's point is a valid one, though. If he's not the only one with this technology, but the only one running at this level, then maybe it makes more sense to let him compete against people who do as well. Maybe we should invert It's Never Lurgi's point. He ought to compete against able-bodied athletes precisely because he is achieving comparable speeds.
posted by cthuljew at 10:58 PM on August 28, 2011
This is why I stopped being interested in track+field. It's like drug fuelled WWF with a pinch of marketing feel-good PR bullshit.
First, she-males, now this. I'd rather watch the ladies play softball in my local park. I'm not joking. That's real sport with ordinary people occasionally doing extraordinary things.
posted by uncanny hengeman at 11:10 PM on August 28, 2011
First, she-males, now this. I'd rather watch the ladies play softball in my local park. I'm not joking. That's real sport with ordinary people occasionally doing extraordinary things.
posted by uncanny hengeman at 11:10 PM on August 28, 2011
It's a huge advantage, and it's totally not fair. No way should this guy have been allowed to compete.
posted by facetious at 11:10 PM on August 28, 2011
posted by facetious at 11:10 PM on August 28, 2011
Ok , wikipedia says it is an advantage. But still, athletes who undergo Tommy John surgery have an advantage as well are allowed to compete in professional sports, would they be allowed to compete in the olympics?
posted by Ad hominem at 11:26 PM on August 28, 2011
posted by Ad hominem at 11:26 PM on August 28, 2011
Contrary to intuition, performance enhancing drugs are banned not because they enhance performance (plenty of things that enhance performance are not banned), but because they are a danger to the athletes, given the overdose arms-race that would ensue if the drugs were legal.
Do the blades endanger his health? No.
The Paralympics uses some handicapp system so that people who cannot possibly match the performance of more abled people, can still compete against them.
Does Pistorous need a handicapp system in order to compete against the best of the best? No.
Do the blades contain a power or energy source? No. It's just Pistorous.
The world championships should be just that - the place where the only thing that matters is performance, and anything goes so long as it's safe. The world championships is the appropriate venue for Pistorous.
An argument could be made that if cutting off limbs really helps (which is far from clear), then there is a danger to athletes that they will be pressured to cut off limbs, but that seems an unlikely danger - one to bear in mind, and keep an eye out for, but it's way to premature at this point to be banning an athlete Just In Case.
posted by -harlequin- at 11:55 PM on August 28, 2011 [2 favorites]
Do the blades endanger his health? No.
The Paralympics uses some handicapp system so that people who cannot possibly match the performance of more abled people, can still compete against them.
Does Pistorous need a handicapp system in order to compete against the best of the best? No.
Do the blades contain a power or energy source? No. It's just Pistorous.
The world championships should be just that - the place where the only thing that matters is performance, and anything goes so long as it's safe. The world championships is the appropriate venue for Pistorous.
An argument could be made that if cutting off limbs really helps (which is far from clear), then there is a danger to athletes that they will be pressured to cut off limbs, but that seems an unlikely danger - one to bear in mind, and keep an eye out for, but it's way to premature at this point to be banning an athlete Just In Case.
posted by -harlequin- at 11:55 PM on August 28, 2011 [2 favorites]
Out of your examples, only contacts are body augmentation, bicycles and swimming trunks are sporting equipment. People generally have the same access to the same level of equipment within a particular level of a sport, and certainly they do at the top levels. Further, the governing body of a particular sporting level has regulations regarding all equipment. Regarding contacts/glasses, it is simple: allow anyone to wear them if they choose.
Fine, lets keep the sporting equipment out, though there are issues of access and affordability here that are quite sensitive for many athletes. But "allow anyone to wear them if they choose" is precisely what many people are not comfortable with, depending on what sport we are talking about and what exactly is the sportsman wearing.
Given how common contact lenses are, I bet most people wouldn't bat an eyelid (I know, sorry) when, say, a pistol shooter discloses that he is wearing contact lenses, even though eyesight is one of the major factors in that sport. Yet, many of these same people would object to the bladerunner, even though there is little to separate the two in a logical sense. Why?
My guess, as I said before, is a personal uncanny valley of sportsmanship/fairness/justice. I don't think it is productive to think about this complex issue in terms of strict rules/regulations.
posted by vidur at 11:56 PM on August 28, 2011
Fine, lets keep the sporting equipment out, though there are issues of access and affordability here that are quite sensitive for many athletes. But "allow anyone to wear them if they choose" is precisely what many people are not comfortable with, depending on what sport we are talking about and what exactly is the sportsman wearing.
Given how common contact lenses are, I bet most people wouldn't bat an eyelid (I know, sorry) when, say, a pistol shooter discloses that he is wearing contact lenses, even though eyesight is one of the major factors in that sport. Yet, many of these same people would object to the bladerunner, even though there is little to separate the two in a logical sense. Why?
My guess, as I said before, is a personal uncanny valley of sportsmanship/fairness/justice. I don't think it is productive to think about this complex issue in terms of strict rules/regulations.
posted by vidur at 11:56 PM on August 28, 2011
Harlequin, do you really believe that there are no athletes who would undergo amputation in exchange for an Olympic gold? It's tacitly acknowledged that many Eastern European medals for women's events were won by contestants who had been taking massive doses of male hormones; gymnasts are notoriously underweight and over-stressed; the Guinness Book of Records regularly eliminates entries for things that turn out to be excessively dangerous. Yes, amputation sounds as if it's a bridge too far ... but do you think there wouldn't be *anybody*?
posted by Joe in Australia at 12:01 AM on August 29, 2011
posted by Joe in Australia at 12:01 AM on August 29, 2011
Out of your examples, only contacts are body augmentation, bicycles and swimming trunks are sporting equipment.
You've drawn exactly no meaningful distinction here.
posted by darksasami at 12:02 AM on August 29, 2011
You've drawn exactly no meaningful distinction here.
posted by darksasami at 12:02 AM on August 29, 2011
Joe - I absolutely believed that athletes would undergo amputation for Olympic gold. It think it's far fetched (at this point) because it's not clear that the blades would increase an athlete's chances of getting the gold. Even if it had been demonstrated that they are a net benefit, any athlete sufficiently high-level to be considering amputation probably (and possibly necessarily) has the wrong build to benefit from it.
In short, as I said, keep an eye on it, just in case, but it's premature for a pre-emptive ban.
posted by -harlequin- at 12:07 AM on August 29, 2011
In short, as I said, keep an eye on it, just in case, but it's premature for a pre-emptive ban.
posted by -harlequin- at 12:07 AM on August 29, 2011
Every time I hear his name on the radio I think they are talking about Jaco Pastorius.
posted by sleepytako at 12:18 AM on August 29, 2011 [1 favorite]
posted by sleepytako at 12:18 AM on August 29, 2011 [1 favorite]
Oscar's blades come from an Icelandic company which have some remarkable ambassadors. The founder Ossur Kristinsson is now heavily involved in charitable work in Haiti and Namibia and Gaza taking high quality durable prosthetic legs to those who can least afford it. They get a lot of assistance from cuban doctors. (I am not yet involved but considering it).
posted by adamvasco at 12:19 AM on August 29, 2011
posted by adamvasco at 12:19 AM on August 29, 2011
Do the blades contain a power or energy source? No. It's just Pistorous.
Do the blades store energy and transfer it back towards the athlete better than muscles and tendons? Yes. End of argument.
posted by uncanny hengeman at 12:23 AM on August 29, 2011
Do the blades store energy and transfer it back towards the athlete better than muscles and tendons? Yes. End of argument.
posted by uncanny hengeman at 12:23 AM on August 29, 2011
Why Oscar Pistorius deserves to run: Hugh Herr directs the Biomechatronics Laboratory at MIT, a group responsible for a number of prosthetic innovations, some of which are making it via his own company (iWalk). He said the reactions to Pistorius' entry into normal sport, from mere hand-wringing to outright disdain and dismay, reveal that we live in a "cell and tissue centric society."
He's hoping that Pistorius' high-profile competitions will help move us toward an evolution in social consciousness: accepting the validity and equality of synthetic body parts just as we do different races and genders. (emphasis added.)
Moreover, what if Pistorius competes in the United States? Can he not seek the protection of Title 42
CHAPTER 126 - EQUAL OPPORTUNITY FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES
Sec. 12101. Findings and purpose
(a) Findings
The Congress finds that
(1) some 43,000,000 Americans have one or more physical or mental disabilities, and this number is increasing as the population as a whole is growing older;
(2) historically, society has tended to isolate and segregate individuals with disabilities, and, despite some improvements, such forms of discrimination against individuals with disabilities continue to be a serious and pervasive social problem;
(3) discrimination against individuals with disabilities persists in such critical areas as employment, housing, public accommodations, education, transportation, communication, recreation, institutionalization, health services, voting, and access to public services;
(4) unlike individuals who have experienced discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, religion, or age, individuals who have experienced discrimination on the basis of disability have often had no legal recourse to redress such discrimination;
And so forth.
From some of the comments in this thread, it seems that it is OK to discriminate against Mr. Pistorius because he is disabled and that would seem to be not only to be wrong, but illegal.
posted by three blind mice at 12:34 AM on August 29, 2011
He's hoping that Pistorius' high-profile competitions will help move us toward an evolution in social consciousness: accepting the validity and equality of synthetic body parts just as we do different races and genders. (emphasis added.)
Moreover, what if Pistorius competes in the United States? Can he not seek the protection of Title 42
CHAPTER 126 - EQUAL OPPORTUNITY FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES
Sec. 12101. Findings and purpose
(a) Findings
The Congress finds that
(1) some 43,000,000 Americans have one or more physical or mental disabilities, and this number is increasing as the population as a whole is growing older;
(2) historically, society has tended to isolate and segregate individuals with disabilities, and, despite some improvements, such forms of discrimination against individuals with disabilities continue to be a serious and pervasive social problem;
(3) discrimination against individuals with disabilities persists in such critical areas as employment, housing, public accommodations, education, transportation, communication, recreation, institutionalization, health services, voting, and access to public services;
(4) unlike individuals who have experienced discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, religion, or age, individuals who have experienced discrimination on the basis of disability have often had no legal recourse to redress such discrimination;
And so forth.
From some of the comments in this thread, it seems that it is OK to discriminate against Mr. Pistorius because he is disabled and that would seem to be not only to be wrong, but illegal.
posted by three blind mice at 12:34 AM on August 29, 2011
Do the blades store energy and transfer it back towards the athlete better than muscles and tendons? Yes. End of argument.
You just banned shoes. Sorry, shoes are allowed. And should be allowed.
posted by -harlequin- at 12:35 AM on August 29, 2011
You just banned shoes. Sorry, shoes are allowed. And should be allowed.
posted by -harlequin- at 12:35 AM on August 29, 2011
uncanny hengeman: "Do the blades store energy and transfer it back towards the athlete better than muscles and tendons? Yes. End of argument"
Where did you get that "yes" from? It's unsettled whether his legs do or do not give him an advantage. The Olympic Comittee thought so at first. But the fact that he is competing now is because a different group of scientists reached different conclusions.
Unfortunately it's really, really difficult to empirically test something like this without having access to his identical (but legged) duplicate to compare performance.
posted by Lorc at 12:39 AM on August 29, 2011 [1 favorite]
Where did you get that "yes" from? It's unsettled whether his legs do or do not give him an advantage. The Olympic Comittee thought so at first. But the fact that he is competing now is because a different group of scientists reached different conclusions.
Unfortunately it's really, really difficult to empirically test something like this without having access to his identical (but legged) duplicate to compare performance.
posted by Lorc at 12:39 AM on August 29, 2011 [1 favorite]
-harlequin-, three blind mice,
You are the exact reason I'm not interested in athletics. The noisy smelly attention-seeking protestin' type people have turned their attention the way of international athletics, and are IN DA MOTHERFUCKEN HOUSE. Show some respect!
Have a listen to yourselves. Title 42 for chrissakes.
posted by uncanny hengeman at 12:45 AM on August 29, 2011
You are the exact reason I'm not interested in athletics. The noisy smelly attention-seeking protestin' type people have turned their attention the way of international athletics, and are IN DA MOTHERFUCKEN HOUSE. Show some respect!
Have a listen to yourselves. Title 42 for chrissakes.
posted by uncanny hengeman at 12:45 AM on August 29, 2011
Do you believe that wheelchair athletes should be able to compete along with able-bodied athletes too? Because, if so, the marathon world record is about to be dropped by over half an hour. And hey, if we are going to allow wheels, why not allow roller blades?
Since any athlete can use a wheelchair or rollerblades, they'd fall under equipment, like shoes, super lightweight bikes or a theoretical exoskeleton and can be banned (or allowed) under existing rules for the sport.
To use blades, an athlete would have to cut off his FEET. I don't see a massive rush of athletes wanting to take that advantage.
He's using the same blades he's used since 2004; when he tried to qualify for the 2008 olympics;
"On that occasion he missed out by 0.3sec on the qualifying standards. He says age has made him physically more mature, he has radically changed his training regime since 2008 and in the last year a strict diet has shed three kilograms in weight. “And it’s come off in the right places, not muscle,” he said.
So now he qualifies by just 0.19sec. Hardly a great leap forward. Training and diet would certainly account for that in an able-bodied athlete. And it is not a time to send ripples through the ranks of one-lap runners. It would not have ranked in the world’s top sixty last year."
I don't see a massive difference in principle to laser eye surgery to correct defective vision. That can result in better vision than they'd have had if they'd be born with 'normal' eyes, yet you don't see a massive rush to ban contact lenses or corrective eye surgery.
Will there come a day when human augmentation gives such a clear advantage that there's a need to set up a special auglympics? Seems likely. Is that day today? No.
posted by ArkhanJG at 12:48 AM on August 29, 2011 [1 favorite]
Since any athlete can use a wheelchair or rollerblades, they'd fall under equipment, like shoes, super lightweight bikes or a theoretical exoskeleton and can be banned (or allowed) under existing rules for the sport.
To use blades, an athlete would have to cut off his FEET. I don't see a massive rush of athletes wanting to take that advantage.
He's using the same blades he's used since 2004; when he tried to qualify for the 2008 olympics;
"On that occasion he missed out by 0.3sec on the qualifying standards. He says age has made him physically more mature, he has radically changed his training regime since 2008 and in the last year a strict diet has shed three kilograms in weight. “And it’s come off in the right places, not muscle,” he said.
So now he qualifies by just 0.19sec. Hardly a great leap forward. Training and diet would certainly account for that in an able-bodied athlete. And it is not a time to send ripples through the ranks of one-lap runners. It would not have ranked in the world’s top sixty last year."
I don't see a massive difference in principle to laser eye surgery to correct defective vision. That can result in better vision than they'd have had if they'd be born with 'normal' eyes, yet you don't see a massive rush to ban contact lenses or corrective eye surgery.
Will there come a day when human augmentation gives such a clear advantage that there's a need to set up a special auglympics? Seems likely. Is that day today? No.
posted by ArkhanJG at 12:48 AM on August 29, 2011 [1 favorite]
-So should roller blades. and cars.-
See, I would rule out the latter. In my perfect daydreaming olympic deathmatch games, you would be allowed to shoot up or strap on anything to your personage. Roller skates, jet packs, sidewinder missile doohickies, heroin, speed-laced megavitamin suppositories. Anything you want. As long as it's lashed or bolted on. And you stay in your lane.
posted by peacay at 12:55 AM on August 29, 2011
See, I would rule out the latter. In my perfect daydreaming olympic deathmatch games, you would be allowed to shoot up or strap on anything to your personage. Roller skates, jet packs, sidewinder missile doohickies, heroin, speed-laced megavitamin suppositories. Anything you want. As long as it's lashed or bolted on. And you stay in your lane.
posted by peacay at 12:55 AM on August 29, 2011
I think anybody who reads the series of very detailed posts on "The Science of Sport" blog will be convinced, as I was, that having ultra-lightweight and ultra-resilient lower legs is a big advantage. Try this post and see what you think.
posted by facetious at 12:59 AM on August 29, 2011 [1 favorite]
posted by facetious at 12:59 AM on August 29, 2011 [1 favorite]
Aimee Mullins. Check out at about 10:30 especially.
posted by zoinks at 12:59 AM on August 29, 2011 [1 favorite]
posted by zoinks at 12:59 AM on August 29, 2011 [1 favorite]
See, I would rule out the latter. In my perfect daydreaming olympic deathmatch games, you would be allowed to shoot up or strap on anything to your personage. Roller skates, jet packs, sidewinder missile doohickies, heroin, speed-laced megavitamin suppositories. Anything you want. As long as it's lashed or bolted on. And you stay in your lane.
Well, ideally, we'd use convicts. Cut off their legs, strap on some razor sharp blades, put wheels on the blades, and light the blades on fire. And lasers on heir foreheads. JUST LIKE THE ORIGINAL OLYMPICS!
posted by BurnChao at 1:14 AM on August 29, 2011
Well, ideally, we'd use convicts. Cut off their legs, strap on some razor sharp blades, put wheels on the blades, and light the blades on fire. And lasers on heir foreheads. JUST LIKE THE ORIGINAL OLYMPICS!
posted by BurnChao at 1:14 AM on August 29, 2011
I think in sports it would be somewhat self-correcting.
Like in 'roid rage and other side effects, causing embarrassment, mental illness and early death. That's self-correcting all right! If you want augmentation, fine. Pistorius is inspirational to amputees, and I think they let him race because they know he's not going to win the whole thing. I hope he does well, but if he did win the whole thing you can bet there would be a hue and cry to not let it happen again. I don't think they would let Pistorius run another Olympic if that happened
That said, allowing unfettered augmentation as a regular thing should result its OWN Augmented Special Olympic. Just like we should have a special baseball league for dopers like Barry Bonds and all the others who use 'roids and other performance enhancing drugs. (disgracing the game, themselves, and setting a bad example for youth). Then, let's follow them long-term to see what happens to people who try to fool Mother Nature, as a general lesson to those who are thinking about following in their footsteps, including youth who are swallowing 'roids at an unprecedented rate because million-dollar freaks just can't enough "hitting power".
posted by Vibrissae at 1:54 AM on August 29, 2011
Like in 'roid rage and other side effects, causing embarrassment, mental illness and early death. That's self-correcting all right! If you want augmentation, fine. Pistorius is inspirational to amputees, and I think they let him race because they know he's not going to win the whole thing. I hope he does well, but if he did win the whole thing you can bet there would be a hue and cry to not let it happen again. I don't think they would let Pistorius run another Olympic if that happened
That said, allowing unfettered augmentation as a regular thing should result its OWN Augmented Special Olympic. Just like we should have a special baseball league for dopers like Barry Bonds and all the others who use 'roids and other performance enhancing drugs. (disgracing the game, themselves, and setting a bad example for youth). Then, let's follow them long-term to see what happens to people who try to fool Mother Nature, as a general lesson to those who are thinking about following in their footsteps, including youth who are swallowing 'roids at an unprecedented rate because million-dollar freaks just can't enough "hitting power".
posted by Vibrissae at 1:54 AM on August 29, 2011
This is a weird synchronicity given a bunch of us have likely just finished (or are currently playing) the new Deus Ex game, in which the entire plot revolves around questions of augmentation and humanity.
posted by Justinian at 3:19 AM on August 29, 2011 [1 favorite]
posted by Justinian at 3:19 AM on August 29, 2011 [1 favorite]
Vibrissae--
Note the fairly tremendous changes in baseball since the end of the roid era.
Oh, excuse me. Did you think pitchers just magically gained superhuman skill?
posted by effugas at 4:00 AM on August 29, 2011
Note the fairly tremendous changes in baseball since the end of the roid era.
Oh, excuse me. Did you think pitchers just magically gained superhuman skill?
posted by effugas at 4:00 AM on August 29, 2011
Interesting take on the subject from Tanni Grey Thompson on the BBC website. Basically saying if he runs they shouldn't run the 400m in the Paralympics now.
posted by lloyder at 4:54 AM on August 29, 2011
posted by lloyder at 4:54 AM on August 29, 2011
Pretty sure we'll end up with "unaugmented" and "augmented" versions of many sports. I can see a market for both. And I hope the Paralympics takes point on making it happen.
posted by seanmpuckett at 5:17 AM on August 29, 2011
posted by seanmpuckett at 5:17 AM on August 29, 2011
BurnChao: "Well, ideally, we'd use convicts. Cut off their legs, strap on some razor sharp blades, put wheels on the blades, and light the blades on fire. And lasers on heir foreheads. JUST LIKE THE ORIGINAL OLYMPICS!"
Sounds more like Motorball.
One old issue of Boys' Life had a comic depicting a future version of football where tackling had been replaced by armed warfare between armored mechs, sort of like Base Wars. The Cub Scouts who had traveled to the future asked if all the explosions were dangerous. "Not at all!" was the reply. "No atomics allowed!"
posted by mkb at 5:33 AM on August 29, 2011
Sounds more like Motorball.
One old issue of Boys' Life had a comic depicting a future version of football where tackling had been replaced by armed warfare between armored mechs, sort of like Base Wars. The Cub Scouts who had traveled to the future asked if all the explosions were dangerous. "Not at all!" was the reply. "No atomics allowed!"
posted by mkb at 5:33 AM on August 29, 2011
I don't think this makes sense while we have the Paralympics.
If he can compete in the regular ones, let him compete in the regular ones too.
If the race is about finding out who has the healthiest body and best running skills
It isn't. It's also about finding out who's the tallest, and who has the most freakish metabolism, and who has the most unusual natural hormone levels, and whose body geometry is most suited to the task at hand even when that differs from a "healthy" geometry, and so on.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 6:24 AM on August 29, 2011 [1 favorite]
If he can compete in the regular ones, let him compete in the regular ones too.
If the race is about finding out who has the healthiest body and best running skills
It isn't. It's also about finding out who's the tallest, and who has the most freakish metabolism, and who has the most unusual natural hormone levels, and whose body geometry is most suited to the task at hand even when that differs from a "healthy" geometry, and so on.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 6:24 AM on August 29, 2011 [1 favorite]
Beat me to it, Pockets!
posted by Pirate-Bartender-Zombie-Monkey at 7:48 AM on August 29, 2011
posted by Pirate-Bartender-Zombie-Monkey at 7:48 AM on August 29, 2011
As long as the emphasis is on winning, you're gonna have steroids amputation.
-Jack Lalanne
posted by Pirate-Bartender-Zombie-Monkey at 7:55 AM on August 29, 2011
-Jack Lalanne
posted by Pirate-Bartender-Zombie-Monkey at 7:55 AM on August 29, 2011
Oscar Pistorius is very impressive, but he's competing in a different event. The only reason we have having this discussion is because the time he's running is close to that of the elite athletes and people think that that means something. If he were running 50 seconds for the 400m then no one would care and if he were running 40 seconds then everyone would know that he has a mechanical advantage. It's because he's running 45 seconds that people assume that he is doing the same thing that able bodied athletes are doing. He's not.
Don't worry, Able McTwolegs, your physical disadvantage is sure to be recognized by the Paralympics.
posted by Sys Rq at 8:49 AM on August 29, 2011
Don't worry, Able McTwolegs, your physical disadvantage is sure to be recognized by the Paralympics.
posted by Sys Rq at 8:49 AM on August 29, 2011
I don't see a massive difference in principle to laser eye surgery to correct defective vision.
Perhaps because it can be done on people with normal vision as well. In order to use the blades you have to have no legs. They are not in addition to legs. They can't be added to perfectly good legs to make them better. Oscar Pistorius has said that he doesn't consider himself handicapped (he doesn't bother using handicapped parking spaces) and good for him. I, personally, would consider the removal of my legs to be a step backwards. So to speak.
I'd also note that the Paralympics has a huge variety of events depending on the nature of the disability. For example, T11-T13 encompass visually impaired athletes. T42-T46 are for amputees (T42-T44 are for variations on lower limb amputees and T46 is for upper limb). There is another group for wheelchair athletes (who, btw, beat able bodied athletes at every distance from 800m up. Except, one must assume, the steeplechase).
These classifications are set up so that athletes are competing with other athletes of comparable status/handicap. The IPC recognizes that an athlete with one leg and one prosthetic, a double amputee with prosthetcis, and a double amputee in a wheelchair should not be competing together and created separate categories for each.
posted by It's Never Lurgi at 9:47 AM on August 29, 2011
Perhaps because it can be done on people with normal vision as well. In order to use the blades you have to have no legs. They are not in addition to legs. They can't be added to perfectly good legs to make them better. Oscar Pistorius has said that he doesn't consider himself handicapped (he doesn't bother using handicapped parking spaces) and good for him. I, personally, would consider the removal of my legs to be a step backwards. So to speak.
I'd also note that the Paralympics has a huge variety of events depending on the nature of the disability. For example, T11-T13 encompass visually impaired athletes. T42-T46 are for amputees (T42-T44 are for variations on lower limb amputees and T46 is for upper limb). There is another group for wheelchair athletes (who, btw, beat able bodied athletes at every distance from 800m up. Except, one must assume, the steeplechase).
These classifications are set up so that athletes are competing with other athletes of comparable status/handicap. The IPC recognizes that an athlete with one leg and one prosthetic, a double amputee with prosthetcis, and a double amputee in a wheelchair should not be competing together and created separate categories for each.
posted by It's Never Lurgi at 9:47 AM on August 29, 2011
Every time I hear his name on the radio I think they are talking about Jaco Pastorius.
Every time I hear about the "blade runner" I think they're talking about the other kind of "blade running."
posted by homunculus at 5:13 PM on August 29, 2011
Every time I hear about the "blade runner" I think they're talking about the other kind of "blade running."
posted by homunculus at 5:13 PM on August 29, 2011
Most rule changes serve one of these purposes:
1. Attempts to make the sport safer. (Usually after an accident or death.)
2. Attempts to hold back change (usually after someone wins using a non-traditional technique. eg the aerodymanic cycling technique getting banned.)
3. Attempts to make the sport more spectator-friendly / more TV-format friendly / more exciting to watch / higher profile.
And often, #1 is used as the cover story for what is really a #2
What we're seeing in this case may be a head-on collision between #2 and #3 :-)
posted by -harlequin- at 7:59 PM on August 29, 2011
1. Attempts to make the sport safer. (Usually after an accident or death.)
2. Attempts to hold back change (usually after someone wins using a non-traditional technique. eg the aerodymanic cycling technique getting banned.)
3. Attempts to make the sport more spectator-friendly / more TV-format friendly / more exciting to watch / higher profile.
And often, #1 is used as the cover story for what is really a #2
What we're seeing in this case may be a head-on collision between #2 and #3 :-)
posted by -harlequin- at 7:59 PM on August 29, 2011
« Older I see. | We Deserve Tim Ferriss Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by infini at 8:52 PM on August 28, 2011 [1 favorite]