The Bionic Sprinter

I've blogged before about the case of Oscar Pistorius, the double-amputee sprinter who was going to be barred from competing in the Olympics on the theory that his high-end prostheses give him an unfair advantage. Now it looks like he's getting the green light. I, for one, welcome our new prosthetically enhanced overlords.

If there comes a time in the future when sprinting is completely dominated by double-amputees using prosthetic legs/feet, I think this is clearly a decision that's going to have to be revisited. But that doesn't strike me as an especially likely outcome, and the Olympics will certainly benefit from the addition of an interesting plotline.

Comments

Plus, very good prosthetic legs/feet will allow us humans to continue fighting against THE BIG DAMN ROBOTS!!!!

Posted by JRVJ | May 17, 2008 3:12 PM

I have no objection to them competing. Or winning medals.

My objection is with them setting records.

Posted by Sangfroid826 | May 17, 2008 3:25 PM

The whole point of sport is that it's arbitrary. Why 100m? Why not 97m? Why have starting blocks? Or shoes? Why not run uphill? Arguing about the rules is pointless. As soon as it's no longer fun people should just stop playing.

Posted by Chris | May 17, 2008 3:51 PM

Also, given this precedent, there will be two perverse incentives.

First (and most benign) will be engineers of prosthetics will work very heard to create the "fastest" prosthetics for their para-athletes who wish to compete in the Olympics. So it may end up that the winner simply has the best-designed legs.

Second is that if prosthetic athletes are shown to have a competitive edge, some extremely competitive types will opt for elective amputation to better compete. It seems almost insane to imagine, but given all the self-destructive things we know that athletes already do to better their performance, this hardly seems like an impossible leap.

Posted by RWB | May 17, 2008 3:53 PM

Why have the Olympic Games at all?

The IOC and all the national committees are just an old-boys network. They choose their own members and they have nothing to do with representing their countries. They just represent themselves and their buddies. Nice living off of perks paid for by taxes.

The IOC has been run by great guys like extreme rightwingers Brundage and Saramanch.

Who cares who runs faster or jumps higher?

Posted by bernarda | May 17, 2008 4:00 PM

Why 100m? Why not 97m? Why have starting blocks? Or shoes? Why not run uphill?

Why have the Olympic Games at all?

Why comment on blogs? Why not just end everything now?

Posted by Bill | May 17, 2008 4:16 PM

IIRC, the runner has never broken 45 seconds in the 400m and it is unlikely that he will qualify for the olympics. Is this a case where the IOC says "yea you can try, but it is obvious that you wont make it in".

I seriously doubt if the IOC would have made the same decision if he had a serious chance to make the olympic roster.

Personally, I wouldnt have a problem if his prosthetic didnt look like huge springs. To me...If he wants to run he needs a prosthetic that at least looks like it has some shins with feet attached to them.

Posted by anonymoose | May 17, 2008 4:16 PM

So who now gets to compete in the paralympics? Are ALL paralympic athletes eligible to compete for the olympic team?

This mixes the olympics and paralympics too much. I understand the former is more prestigious, but the latter should be as prestigious and could use the media attention an athlete like this could generate.

Posted by tom.a | May 17, 2008 5:46 PM

don't be sure about it being a one time thing!

http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/olympic_runners_feeling

(For the uninitiated, The Onion is a satire site.)

Posted by dave | May 17, 2008 5:58 PM

It seems to me to be a rather bad idea. There will be many more different ways where it will be hard to draw a line between allowed/disallowed when prostethics are involved.

Posted by Bengt Larsson | May 17, 2008 6:08 PM

Maybe the next guy will want wheels on the bottom. Effectively roller blading at 15-20 MPH. Or,how different is this from an endurance challenged athlete taking EPO? Without clear guidelines regarding the exact nature of the competition these lines will blur to the point of absurdity.

Posted by Neil H. | May 17, 2008 6:09 PM

I'm waiting for when they show the high-jumper in slow motion with the Bionic Man sound.

Posted by Other Ezra | May 17, 2008 6:18 PM

This is a ridiculous ruling and matt's justification is daft.

If there comes a time in the future when sprinting is completely dominated by double-amputees using prosthetic legs/feet, I think this is clearly a decision that's going to have to be revisited. But that doesn't strike me as an especially likely outcome, and the Olympics will certainly benefit from the addition of an interesting plotline.

So it's ok for him to compete as long as he has no chance of winning? How does that make sense? And you likely won't even get your interesting plotline since he hasn't been able to make the minimum qualifying time for the 400m.

Posted by WillieStyle | May 17, 2008 7:07 PM

The dude is ridiculously hot which also helps.

Posted by cbc | May 17, 2008 7:10 PM

You know, thinking about this as an engineer, I don't think this can get out of hand as long as a few parameters are outlined.

Ultimately, you can' make a (unpowered) prosthesis that will give out more energy than you put in. So, as long as they are not powered and have physical dimensions in line with normal humans, they will still be at a disadvantage to non-amputee's because they will not have calf and foot muscles, which are a source of extra energy.

Maybe.

Posted by Chuck | May 17, 2008 9:20 PM

Or, less stupid and fanciful, if a single double amputee using prosthetic legs/feet is unbeatable for a significant amount of time, posting implausible times, the issue will need to be revisited.

Posted by sherifffruitfly | May 17, 2008 9:43 PM

There's a reason that wheelchair athletes have a separate category in marathons and the like. It's because they're nearly twice as fast! That's the sort of technological advances that we're dealing with. It's simply not fair to Olympic athletes, as cool as it might seem to those of you who welcome the day that our robot overlords take over.

Posted by runner | May 17, 2008 9:45 PM

Yes, cyborgs can run fast - until they get run over by motorcycles or cars!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nA99GfBBSZM&feature=related

At least these athletes aren't quite this much cyborg yet:
http://www.daemonstv.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/terminator_poster1.jpg

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | May 17, 2008 10:12 PM

Hey, it looks like I'm the only one who got the Simpsons reference. Or at least the only one who feels the need to brag about it.

Posted by David J. Balan | May 17, 2008 11:51 PM

Yeah, what a lucky prick this guy is, getting to run without the bottom half of his legs!

All those people who say, "Well maybe rocket-powered jet skis will be next!" are using the same logic that trogs use to argue that by allowing same-sex marriage, we will only invite animal-human marriages soon afterwards.

For everyone arguing that the Paralympics are as good as the Olympics, I'm sure you're fine with civil unions for same-sex couples, but not marriages, correct?

Posted by LnGrrrR | May 18, 2008 2:14 AM

Fantastic! This is the first real reason I've heard in some time that makes me want to watch the games. I really hope he wins the silver -- the gold, alas, will almost certainly get this ruling revoked.

Interestingly, there IS some precedent. Gymnast George Eyser won SIX medals (including three gold) in the 1904 Olympics, despite his wooden leg. It probably helped that the Europeans basically didn't show, but still...

Bernarda:
"Who cares who runs faster or jumps higher?"

The athletes-- dedicated young men and women who have spent countless hours and most of their young lives working to achieve the elusive dream of Olympic gold.

I don't care about sports, and I don't really care about the commercial, politically dubious, scandal tainted beast the Olympics has become. But to the athletes, it means the world, and I say more power to them.

Posted by Anthony Damiani | May 18, 2008 2:59 AM

"...they will still be at a disadvantage to non-amputee's because they will not have calf and foot muscles, which are a source of extra energy."

I forget where I read this, but when running the calf muscle is apparently used to stabilize impact, rather than to propel forward. Propulsion (what little of it comes from below the knee) is due to the springiness of the tendons as they release from compression. If that's right, I could see where this particular prosthesis could provide more oomph than a regular calf/foot, because as one commenter noted, they look like giant springs.

Posted by DKE | May 18, 2008 8:11 AM

The prostheses are more efficient than lower legs/feet. All other things being equal, the amputee would have an advantage.

When asked about taking a pill that would guarantee that they would dominate their field but would take 20 years off their life, most athletes say "yes". THe question isn't whether athletes will want their legs amputated, it is if the large numbers who do will be able to find doctors willing to do it.

Posted by Njorl | May 19, 2008 1:58 AM

diyetle zayıflamak

Posted by diyetle zayıflamak | May 19, 2008 9:22 AM

zayıflama

Posted by zatıflama | May 19, 2008 9:29 AM