DanNolan
Well-Known Member
- Oct 14, 2006
- 1,369
- 2,524
The Olympics has come and gone, heroes have been created, dreams fulfilled and one man became a self confessed living legend. In addition to this though, one achievement was made that was unique; a disabled athlete competed against able bodied competitors for the first time in history. Pistorius made history running in the 400m and made the semi finals proving that through use of his ability alone, he was rubbing shoulders with the elite, as an equal.
The issue of Pistorius is a curious one; hero among fellow athletes and spectators alike, his achievements are recognised by everyone. Very rarely is a bad word said about the well liked South African. However, it could be argued that it would take but one race to change opinions regarding this superb athlete, and his participation in both forms of the Olympics.
Pistorius fulfils him dream by running is the Olympics, as an equal.
The Paralympics games offer a chance for disabled athletes the same chance as their able bodied counterparts, to compete for the title of the world’s best on the biggest global stage of them all. Oscar however, has achieved all there is to achieve in this form of the games and is now almost “too good” for his fellow athletes to compete against, and so he headed to the Olympic Games as a disabled athlete in search of competition. It is widely recognised that he, as a “disabled athlete”, is less able and therefore at a disadvantage compared to his fellow Olympic rivals. This begs the question however, is he at a disadvantage, or actually is the fact of the matter that while Oscar has no lower legs, he actually enjoys many advantages over able bodied athletes and therefore is actually competing with the advantage?
In the current climate the fact is that Oscar managed to reach the semi finals, therefore this could be deemed as the best result all around. Oscar managed to win his respect as an equal while not affecting the results of the big race, and not changing the fortunes of the athletes at the top of their sport. While this continues to happen, the issue of fairness that surrounds his “blades” will be swept under the carpet as a non matter. However it is very interesting to imagine what might have happened were he to have run a great race and taken the place of a contender in the Olympic final. Of even more interest, what would have happened if better still he was able to achieve a medal performance. Would his fellow competitors still hold him in the same affinity (illustrated by Kirani James below); would they still celebrate his achievements? I suspect not. It is human nature to be envious of those who achieve your own dreams and if the athletes were to believe that an unfair advantage was being enjoyed by a fellow athlete, it is very likely they would make that view felt.
New Olympic champion Kirani James: ‘Oscar is someone special, especially in our event. It’s a memorable moment for me to be out here performing with him.
‘He’s an inspiration to all of us. He is very special to our sport. He’s a down to earth guy and a great individual. I thought it was a nice gesture to exchange bibs. I am going to keep it.’ (Quote Daily Mail 2012)
As a sprinter you are susceptible to a number of injuries; common sense and past history tells us that most of these injuries are related to ones legs. Familiar injuries suffered include ankle injuries, calf muscle injuries and perhaps most commonly hamstring injuries. While humanity will always encourage empathy towards a disabled athlete due to the compassion we possess towards ill fortune, from purely a sporting viewpoint it is common sense that Oscar Pistorius cannot possibly suffer from these injuries due to him having artificial replaceable leg limbs (blades). This therefore gives the advantage that at no time can he suffer with the injuries most common for sprinting and nor can he fail to properly warm up a leg muscle and so pull or tear it. Finals in athletics history are littered with heartbreaking injury stories from instances such as Derek Redmond battling back from injury in the Barcelona games only to pull a muscle while in contention, to most recently Asafa Powell being unable to finish the 100m final at the London Olympic pulling a groin. I am by no stretch of the imagination suggesting that Oscar’s loss of limbs is more tragic than career defining and ending injuries; the fact that his limbs are created solely for the use of running and are unable to suffer these injuries gives him a marked advantage over current athletes. In addition to this, and most evident is Pistorius’ event, is the issue of tiredness and lactic acid. In the 400m, an event using both aerobic and anaerobic energy systems, a major part of training is the training of pushing back the lactic acid threshold. While Pistorius is sure to suffer from such a build up, the effects will be less remarkable during the fight to the line down the home straight and he therefore hold the ultimate advantage.
As has earlier been suggested, at present the advantages that Oscar may possess are almost irrelevant due to his place just below the top table of 400m sprinters. The issue presents itself that in a sport that is progressing at a rapid rate, who is to say that developments made to his blades in the future or more importantly those of a future more talented disabled athlete, won’t bridge the gap on the top sprinters creating a standoff in the face of fairness. Just 24 years ago Ben Johnson of Canada ran a blistering 9.77 100m race under the influence of performance enhancing drugs, this was seen rightly as cheating as he had an unfair advantage that the other athletes could not naturally possess; an advantage that the other athletes did not have that made it easier for him to run a much faster time. While ethically the use of blades and that of performance enhancing drugs are worlds apart, can it not be argued that they are in effect creating the same result, an advantage over the athletes who do not have them? Ben Johnson without the drugs was a world class athlete in his own right as is Pistorius, the drugs merely gave him the push to become THE best, they enabled him to run the 0.2 seconds quicker which would elevate one from world class to legend status. Performance enhancing drugs can create an ability to be able to train harder, to run faster and to not tire as quickly, all traits shared by the blades of Pistorius.
It is clear that Oscar Pistorius is an athlete who deserves our adulation, one that we should admire and respect. When dealt a cruel hand by life his pure talent, hard work and determination led him to becoming the most incredible athlete the Paralympics has ever seen. While one cannot possibly want to punish an athlete of such integrity and liken him to those who cheat fellow athletes and the athletics world, by taking illegal substances to give them an advantage, thought must be given to where this saga will lead. Whether using blades or taking drugs, fellow athletes will not stand for their rivals being able to obtain a clear advantage which inevitably will lead to a clash in the event of an athlete with blades winning a medal in the Olympics. While seeing a disabled athlete run alongside the able bodied in London was a proud, memorable and emotional experience one fears that this must signal the end of such happenings for the sake of the sports future. Fears are that we will be entangled in a war over just what is deemed fair in athletics which could lead in arguments that drugs are as fair as blades in terms of performance, leading to the abolishment drug testing and the end of athletics as a sport rather than a scientist’s playground.
If you enjoy athletics check out my blog on which this was posted. All comments welcome.
http://sportaccordingtonolan.wordpress.com/
The issue of Pistorius is a curious one; hero among fellow athletes and spectators alike, his achievements are recognised by everyone. Very rarely is a bad word said about the well liked South African. However, it could be argued that it would take but one race to change opinions regarding this superb athlete, and his participation in both forms of the Olympics.
Pistorius fulfils him dream by running is the Olympics, as an equal.
The Paralympics games offer a chance for disabled athletes the same chance as their able bodied counterparts, to compete for the title of the world’s best on the biggest global stage of them all. Oscar however, has achieved all there is to achieve in this form of the games and is now almost “too good” for his fellow athletes to compete against, and so he headed to the Olympic Games as a disabled athlete in search of competition. It is widely recognised that he, as a “disabled athlete”, is less able and therefore at a disadvantage compared to his fellow Olympic rivals. This begs the question however, is he at a disadvantage, or actually is the fact of the matter that while Oscar has no lower legs, he actually enjoys many advantages over able bodied athletes and therefore is actually competing with the advantage?
In the current climate the fact is that Oscar managed to reach the semi finals, therefore this could be deemed as the best result all around. Oscar managed to win his respect as an equal while not affecting the results of the big race, and not changing the fortunes of the athletes at the top of their sport. While this continues to happen, the issue of fairness that surrounds his “blades” will be swept under the carpet as a non matter. However it is very interesting to imagine what might have happened were he to have run a great race and taken the place of a contender in the Olympic final. Of even more interest, what would have happened if better still he was able to achieve a medal performance. Would his fellow competitors still hold him in the same affinity (illustrated by Kirani James below); would they still celebrate his achievements? I suspect not. It is human nature to be envious of those who achieve your own dreams and if the athletes were to believe that an unfair advantage was being enjoyed by a fellow athlete, it is very likely they would make that view felt.
New Olympic champion Kirani James: ‘Oscar is someone special, especially in our event. It’s a memorable moment for me to be out here performing with him.
‘He’s an inspiration to all of us. He is very special to our sport. He’s a down to earth guy and a great individual. I thought it was a nice gesture to exchange bibs. I am going to keep it.’ (Quote Daily Mail 2012)
As a sprinter you are susceptible to a number of injuries; common sense and past history tells us that most of these injuries are related to ones legs. Familiar injuries suffered include ankle injuries, calf muscle injuries and perhaps most commonly hamstring injuries. While humanity will always encourage empathy towards a disabled athlete due to the compassion we possess towards ill fortune, from purely a sporting viewpoint it is common sense that Oscar Pistorius cannot possibly suffer from these injuries due to him having artificial replaceable leg limbs (blades). This therefore gives the advantage that at no time can he suffer with the injuries most common for sprinting and nor can he fail to properly warm up a leg muscle and so pull or tear it. Finals in athletics history are littered with heartbreaking injury stories from instances such as Derek Redmond battling back from injury in the Barcelona games only to pull a muscle while in contention, to most recently Asafa Powell being unable to finish the 100m final at the London Olympic pulling a groin. I am by no stretch of the imagination suggesting that Oscar’s loss of limbs is more tragic than career defining and ending injuries; the fact that his limbs are created solely for the use of running and are unable to suffer these injuries gives him a marked advantage over current athletes. In addition to this, and most evident is Pistorius’ event, is the issue of tiredness and lactic acid. In the 400m, an event using both aerobic and anaerobic energy systems, a major part of training is the training of pushing back the lactic acid threshold. While Pistorius is sure to suffer from such a build up, the effects will be less remarkable during the fight to the line down the home straight and he therefore hold the ultimate advantage.
As has earlier been suggested, at present the advantages that Oscar may possess are almost irrelevant due to his place just below the top table of 400m sprinters. The issue presents itself that in a sport that is progressing at a rapid rate, who is to say that developments made to his blades in the future or more importantly those of a future more talented disabled athlete, won’t bridge the gap on the top sprinters creating a standoff in the face of fairness. Just 24 years ago Ben Johnson of Canada ran a blistering 9.77 100m race under the influence of performance enhancing drugs, this was seen rightly as cheating as he had an unfair advantage that the other athletes could not naturally possess; an advantage that the other athletes did not have that made it easier for him to run a much faster time. While ethically the use of blades and that of performance enhancing drugs are worlds apart, can it not be argued that they are in effect creating the same result, an advantage over the athletes who do not have them? Ben Johnson without the drugs was a world class athlete in his own right as is Pistorius, the drugs merely gave him the push to become THE best, they enabled him to run the 0.2 seconds quicker which would elevate one from world class to legend status. Performance enhancing drugs can create an ability to be able to train harder, to run faster and to not tire as quickly, all traits shared by the blades of Pistorius.
It is clear that Oscar Pistorius is an athlete who deserves our adulation, one that we should admire and respect. When dealt a cruel hand by life his pure talent, hard work and determination led him to becoming the most incredible athlete the Paralympics has ever seen. While one cannot possibly want to punish an athlete of such integrity and liken him to those who cheat fellow athletes and the athletics world, by taking illegal substances to give them an advantage, thought must be given to where this saga will lead. Whether using blades or taking drugs, fellow athletes will not stand for their rivals being able to obtain a clear advantage which inevitably will lead to a clash in the event of an athlete with blades winning a medal in the Olympics. While seeing a disabled athlete run alongside the able bodied in London was a proud, memorable and emotional experience one fears that this must signal the end of such happenings for the sake of the sports future. Fears are that we will be entangled in a war over just what is deemed fair in athletics which could lead in arguments that drugs are as fair as blades in terms of performance, leading to the abolishment drug testing and the end of athletics as a sport rather than a scientist’s playground.
If you enjoy athletics check out my blog on which this was posted. All comments welcome.
http://sportaccordingtonolan.wordpress.com/
