4 ms·
> I think the most obvious evidence that these prosthetics do not constitute an advantage is the times of other athletes using identical limbs. Pistorius is who
by MSM 14y ago
> I think the most obvious evidence that these prosthetics do not constitute an advantage is the times of other athletes using identical limbs. Pistorius is whole seconds faster than his nearest rivals. If the limbs constitute a meaningful advantage, then why is Pistorius so uniquely quick?
You're mixing apples and oranges here.
In the highest most competitive horse races, it's not uncommon to still see horses that win by large margins. Having a horse win without advantage against other horses is not a good reason to start having humans race against horses.
- gaius 14y agoOr isn't it? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/mid/3801177.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/mid/3801177.stm
- yuliyp 14y agoThe size of the population from which the top race horses are drawn is orders of magnitude smaller than the size of the set of human track athletes. Thus in the Olympics, you're looking at specimens a few standard deviations above the mean, instead of only 1 or 2 in horse races, which means the very top ones are going to be significantly better than the rest of the competition.
- MSM 14y agoVery true, but that actually validates my point- how many amputees actively strive to participate in the paralympics? I would estimate that pool is smaller than all the horses being raced, meaning his accomplishment of beating other racers is even less significant.