The 2012 London Olympics - Page 6

I think the issue is the slippery slope. The bladerunner does not seem to have a competitive advantage now, he is not dominating events and arguing to prohibit him from competition seems mean spirited and wrong on it's face. And right now the idea that a runner would amputate his feet, or his legs in order to install the latest version of General Dynamics "winatallcosts" robolegs seems ridiculous and contrary to the intention of sport.

 

But again there is that slippery slope to contend with, it is amazing what kind of nonsense competition can bring out. We had badmittdon players throwing olympic matches. Cyclists faking crashes, judges and referees cheating in boxing......all in the name of securing gold. Performance enhanceing drugs have been a reality in top level sports for decades. How is it so far fetched to worry that someone might seek to exploit a loophole in the rules to gain competitive advantage?

 

So all in all the bladerunner is a test case in this very issue, and even though I think this guy should be able to run in this olympics......I am worried about the precedent it might set.

 

 

OK, go chop off your feet and arms and get this done, and I PROMISE I will support your Olympic bid. 

 

 

What it comes down to is that AT THIS POINT, I fail to see a tremendous competitive advantage for Pretorius - if he got SOME to get to the Olympics, well, I'm willing to give a double-amputee some benefit of the doubt, especially, as Bailey points out, he's not even in the discussion for a medal. At some future date, maybe I'll feel tech has advanced enough where these guys DO have a competitive advantage. I think that is when the Paralympics get more interesting than the regular Olympics. 

I really worry about the future, and I just think that running  as an event should be defined as humans running on two feet. If we're going to include other sorts of locomotion and biomechanical tools, then we're not comparing like athletes. What if this guy had flippers installed and beat out Phelps in the pool? It's an extremely slippery slope as you point out.

 

I don't want to seem like a grouch and shit all over this guy's big moment, but he's setting a precedent and there are important issues at stake.

 

Edited to add: Even if he's not in competition for a medal, I'd hate to be a runner from his home country who missed out on the games simply because he didn't have the advantage of blades on his feet.

 

 

It's SPORTS....right now I think the more important issue is that being "disabled" doesn't preclude you from doing some pretty amazing stuff. 

 

 

If/when the competitive issue of people becoming cyborgs to win gold arises, I'm pretty sure the IOC re-evaluate. 

Yes I guess we disagree about the important issue. This man already has access to the para-Olympics. He can be amazing in those games. To have someone for whom "running" is completely different on a biomechanical level - aided by technology and composite materials - compete against flesh and blood fleet footed humans.. it just seems wrong. It's not the same sport, and they're not starting from an equal position.

 

 

Well, the Court of Arbitration for Sport apparently disagrees with your opinion as well. 

 

 

 

I don't agree with the criteria that they use to evaluate this. It doesn't matter that there are some drawbacks. It matters that he's not running the way other runners run. It's not comparing the same biomechanical operations.

 

That's just my opinion and I don't want to get into a big argument about it, but many people and well informed experts side with me on this.

 

The reasons outlined here make perfect sense to me: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/olympics/athletics/7141302.stm

Not to mention the rather simple and obvious fact that this guy is not footless by choice.  If medical science starts implementing elective procedures that replace limbs with something "better", I think we'd know about it.  And if an athlete did that, I think, again, everyone would be well aware of it.  Unless you're talking about countries secretly amputating children's limbs and... you know what, I don't even need to finish that thought.  Starting to sound too much like a crackpot conspiracy theory that I try not to give any credence to.

What is to stop China from turning up with someone who "lost their feet in an accident", with the paperwork to back up that story? Just like their "totally over 18! Here are some forged documents to prove it!" gymnastics team from 2008?

 

How he lost his feet doesn't ultimately matter for me (though it's tragic he lost them, of course). It's the fact he now runs on carbon fiber blades instead of feet.

I find the fact that he's in the Olympics inspirational, but to be honest I do see some of Hartford's points.

 

The problem will arise when there's more than just one person in this condition, but several, and then you get into what materials and form factors are acceptable. This doesn't seem outright like a big advantage at this point, but you can't argue that it makes comparisons with other athletes a bit more complicated. 

Just to be clear, I find the fact this guy lost his feet and now can run like the wind to be totally awesome.

Yeah, what's to stop those evil Chinese from genetically engineering men-women with roboarms and legs and dolphin brains with lasers on their foreheads?  You gotta draw a line somewhere!

There are so many factors at work here that it's impossible to say if there's an net advantage or not. He's carrying less weight, doesn't have lower leg muscles to become fatigued and effectively requires less oxygen, and can arguably finish stronger than regular athletes. On the other hand, he has a tremendous disadvantage at starting a race.

 

It would be interesting to see a long distance runner with these blades, I get the impression there could be a far greater benefit over longer distances than sprints but don't know enough to say for sure.

Next thing you know people will be racing in giant machines propelled by engines!  It's madness!

Dr. Harford, do you have an issue with archers and sharpshooters who compete while wearing corrective lenses?

 

That might be a poor comparison, since corrective lenses can only correct vision to a set ceiling limit (that we know of)...and they are generally available, in some form or fashion, to all who seek it.

But what if science creates x-ray radar heat seeking cyber glasses?  It's a slippery slope!

 

I was thinking the same thing, but backed off from that comparison since we can exactly measure human eyesight, they're not telescopic nor provide any electronic visual aides. Look they investigated the use of these artificial legs and said they provide no advantage, that seems fair but it also seems fair to ask these questions.

 

To me is also similar to the whole debate around swimmer high tech suits, although in this case the use is a million times more sympathetic in nature and intent.

I think it's awesome that he's racing with the rest of the field. Ain't nobody gonna break his stride, ain't nobody gonna slow him down. Godspeed to him.

Also, i think that letting the guy race upholds the SPIRIT of what the Olympics should stand for: human achievement in athletics. The fact that this guy has found a way to overcome his handicap and race with 'normal' athletes is incredibly inspiring. Let him have his day.

 

More like Sciencespeed, the bloody cheater!

 

edit: I'll stop now.

That is a very interesting question, thank you for putting it to me. My answer would be simple lenses that refract light, no. Some sort of advanced HUD that gave you information and detail beyond what humans could on their own achieve? Yes. Like Nooj said, there is a ceiling for vision.

Here is a ridiculous (though a few decades from now with genetic engineering? Perhaps more serious) question I was thinking about earlier this week, that now is on topic given our conversation. If a swimmer decided to have his nose removed and face and head smoothed surgically to better allow them to glide through liquid, perhaps their toes and fingers sealed together with flesh grafts, should their results count? I'd actually say "yes", since they're not being boosted in any way, just shaping their bodies to better excel at their sport.
Edited by Dr Harford - 8/4/12 at 2:04pm

 

Yeah, if you look at his personal bests vs WR times, he's 1 sec off the pace over 100 meters (which at that level of competition, he might as well finish an hour back), 2 sec off over 200 m but seems to hold off - the numbers I saw were about 2 sec off at 400 m. 

 

I'd say the better question would be, "Are you Voldemort?"

 

 

Yeah, the "refutation" article Harford posted was written after the IAAF's initial ban of Pistorious' blades, prior to further research and the CAS overturning said ban - in which the reasoning IMO broke down to the blades give him SOME advantages over runners with feet, but also have some inherent disadvantages as well (starting, turning) that essentially even it out. 

GB won 6 gold medals and a silver today.

 

HOLY. FUCKING. SHIT.

 

Shitfacedness beckons again I reckon!

Congrats, guys! That is great!

Wow, Great Britain eliminated by South Korea in penalties. I feel really bad for Sturridge, but he shouldn't feel the lost solely on him... although that was an uber crappy penalty kick attempt.

 

 

Not only that but 2 golds in 15 minutes.

 

Carry on like this and GB will have to build a Scrooge McDuck bin to hold all that glory.

Jess was brilliant but it was Mo Farah's win in the 10k that was the highlight for me. The way he just kicked on and stormed to the line then his American mate came second and they were hugging and grinning then Mo's wife and kid came down to meet him and it was all so goddamn 'awwwwwww'.

Even though the swimming wasn't too good for us, I'm sad it's over mainly because of Gary Lineker and Ian Thorpe's wicked presenting bromance.

Really don't want the games to end, it's great having all this literally 5 minutes up the road from me!

The 10K was awesome.  Great finish.

The Women's Triathlon finish last night was astounding too. These girls swam/biked/ran for 2 hours and had not even 0.01 seconds to separate them at the line so they had to literally go to the photo finish.

 

Literally.

 

 

Thanks for the early morning goosebumps, Andy Murray.

Wow, Murray destroyed Federer ... wasn't even close.

I didn't get to see any of the match, but wow, indeed.  Very happy for Murray, but now this puts even more pressure for him to get it done at Wimbledon.  (Of course, it should give him a ton more confidence too.)

 

And Djoker lost the bronze medal match!  That is shocking.  Hope that means Juan Martin is ready to go for the US Open.  If Nadal is not fit for the tournament, we need another serious contender to make things more interesting.

So I'm looking at the NBC schedule and I don't see anything about women's gymnastics tonight ... are they really going to delay events from today for tomorrow night?!?!?! (since they already spoiled the vault results on their website ...)

Feel so sorry for you guys, I've heard nothing good about NBC's coverage at all while here I am spoiled silly by the BBC covering and streaming everything ad-free.

Anyway, pity about the mixed doubles but it was close, and a valiant effort. Still amazed at the way Murray defeated Federer earlier and kind of felt sorry for him as te Olympic gold is the only thing he hasn't won.

Well he does have a doubles gold, as well as the singles silver.  I'd imagine a silver medal is a hell of a lot better than that plate they get as runner-up of Wimbledon.  Plus, y'know, 17 slams.  I don't feel sorry for him for a second.

 

You have no idea. I have a very fast fiber network connection to my house, the video sometimes looks awfully pixelated. But worse, I was watching the 100m semis with Gatlin and the player decides to lose connection. No problem, I hit the reload button on the browser, bam! I get hit by a 15 second commercial (they always show a commercial at feed startup) and miss the event live.

 

I wish I could pay the UK government taxes so I could get the BBC coverage over here.

Line of the NBC coverage of the Olympics: "It doesn't matter who's in front of the six foot four Hooker!"

Spoilers for the 100m race.

 

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 

I was just getting wave after wave of goosebumps watching those two guys celebrate around the stadium afterward.

Andy Murray going back to hug that little boy in the stands after his win is the highlight of the Olympics to me.  They even managed to track the kid down and interview him!

 

In Canada we get about 4 different channels showing the games. NBC, CTV, TSN, and Sportsnet. NBC tends to suck.

And they're apparently launching an all sports network! I cannot wait to watch those hard to catch mid-week NBA and MLB games a few days later, on the weekend.

Is that NBC Sports Network? That popped up on my cable subscription just before the Olympics. Never heard of it before.

Another fun thing about the BBC's coverage is that they've started showing their analysts' ever so calm and professional reactions to races as they happened.

 

10,000 Meters

 

 

I just love how even Michael Johnson loses his shit, cheering on Galen Rupp.

 

 

100 Meters Final

 

 

Whereas here, Michael is just Pro as Fuck while Colin Jackson falls apart in endearing fashion.

 

That's  the channel formerly known as Versus.

To all British Chewers: your country appears to be doing a stellar job putting on these Olympics.  Cheers!

Late to the party, but this

is my pick for Quote of the Decade.

 

Also, I think the archery / corrective lenses argument kinda loses its value when you remember that one of this year's archery gold medalists was blind.

 

I was shocked by how much Murray dominated the match against Federer, but Federer played poorly (for him) the last couple of matches.