do you think double amputee should be able to compete for a spot in the olympics?

The muscles, tendons and joints of the lower leg act like a spring when a person is running.

Modern synthetic materials, such as those used in Pistorius' legs, can be much, much springier than a human leg could ever be. Unless we could establish a standard range for the spring action of a real human leg and make Pistorius prove that his synthetic legs don't exceed this range, I don't think that he should be allowed to compete.

Yes, I'm saying that a double amputee might have an advantage in a sport against able-bodied people.

There are other reasons why I don't think he should be allowed to compete, all of them about an unfair advantage that he might have, but this is the biggest one.

...

No, I don't have an answer, I ponder the same question as you do.

It appears that the blades actually provide more forward impetus than what human legs can do.

Which is not to say that it's not a tragedy that he lost both of his legs, and given the choice, I think it goes without saying he'd have his natural over the artificial.

I don't know if the ancient games allowed for or prohibited any kind of prosthetic or other performance enhancing device . . . or drug. Both ancient and modern games certainly allow for nations to provide their competitors, whether right or wrong, with the best of training conditions to prepare for the competition.

Ostensibly the modern Olympics have been games that have prohibited chemical performance enhancers.

If Oscar Pistorius had no chance of competing in the Olympics, this would not be an issue, of course.

But now that it is, my question is, what are the limits?

Clearly the line has been drawn in the sand against drugs. But what about other electronic performance-enhancing devices? I'm not saying that the future Olympics will feature solely bionic men and women. But why not? What's to keep that from happening?

I suspect this will be a moot point. I believe Oscar has yet to make his national team.

Interesting question, that's all I can say. Thank you!

Regards,

Running_Dad

The reason the IAAF ruled against him is because his blades are adjustable springs that aid in running.

He can not compete with able bodied athletes since he has not run the qualifying time for the 400 meters.

His country may put him on their 4x400 relays just so he can say he was an Olympian.

He intends to run in the paralympics so I guess he wants it both ways.

I don't think people should be allowed to compete with aides, because someone has to decide when their aid becomes an advantage.

His spring like appendages have been proven to give him a 30% advantage (allowing him to run faster, using less energy than a person with legs.) If he runs with others who use the same devices, fine. But why allow him an unfair advantage?

the fastest amputee could not compete with the best able bodied athlete's and that's been proved