Oscar Pistorius Being Allowed To Run Makes A Mockery Of The Olympics

Allowing a double amputee to run against able bodied athletes in the Olympics on synthetic, carbon fibre legs and feet makes a mockery of the competition.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport overturned an International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) ruling preventing Oscar Pistorius from running in the Olympic 400m, on the basis that the artificial “blade” feet “do not give him an unfair advantage”.

The Court is actually an arbitration tribunal, with three arbiters usually deciding cases. One arbiter each is chosen by both sides from a panel, with the panel president chosen either by agreement of the two designated arbiters or failing that, the President of the Arbitration Division. Thus, a completely incompetent panel is unlikely to arise via this selection process.

Nevertheless, Oscar Pistorius’ case is novel and the biomechanical evidence is in serious dispute. A ruling from the Court does not mean we should have faith that sufficient relevant, available evidence to make a correct decision was presented and understood. The previously linked article alleges that it was not.

The energy transfer and storage of the blades means that Pistorius runs differently to able bodied athletes, as the IAAF study presented to the Court showed. Suppose that just by chance, the positives and negatives of the blades approximately cancel and Pistorius runs similar times to the other athletes over a particular distance. This is in fact what happened in the 400m at the London Olympics, where Pistorius came last in his semi final.

It does not follow that the approximate cancellation of advantages and disadvantages will obtain over other distances. Suppose Pistorius decided to run the 800m and found an advantage over the final lap. Suppose in a couple of years he or someone else gets an improved set of blades. There will be no cancellation of advantages and disadvantages then. What if he gets a better set of artificial feet and runs 43 flat for a world record in Rio? It’s possible … and also ridiculous to allow.

It’s great that Pistorius has worked so hard and been successful. The development of his artificial legs will help many other amputees lead more normal and fulfilling lives. If a professional athletics meet wants to let him run against able bodied athletes, there should be no problem. Chess players have been playing computers in tournaments for years. If Usain Bolt wants to run against greyhounds and cheetahs or Michael Phelps swim against dolphins, why not, if people will pay to watch it?

But world records and Olympic medals are different. The sporting federations go to enormous lengths in their drug testing to ensure no athletes have any artificial excesses of naturally occurring hormones. But a bloke with carbon fibre feet is allowed to run against athletes with real feet, possibly setting records? This is just not a credible position.

The real reason for the equivocation and acquiescence is that disabled is the new black. We can’t stop him running because we’d be subjecting him to oppression after all the hardship he’s had to endure in his life, so let’s pretend there isn’t a problem. Just as Murali would have been no balled out of the game were he white, as happened to Ian Meckiff.

I’d like to see Pistorius get some new blades and run a world record, which of course the overwhelming majority of athletes and the general public would not accept. Then people would have to discuss this ludicrous situation with more honesty.

Update:

Oscar Pistorius has complained that "we aren't racing a fair race" after losing the T44 final in the London Paralympics. Why?

Because the winner had longer artificial blades. Tu quoque, Oscar? Usain Bolt has longer legs than Yohan Blake. Is that fair?