3 ms·

I'm surprised that everywhere I read, people are more interested in wondering how much of an advantage his condition gives him, than considering that perhaps it

I'm surprised that everywhere I read, people are more interested in wondering how much of an advantage his condition gives him, than considering that perhaps it is a great disadvantage. People are claiming things like, "oh, his heart has to pump less blood a shorter distance." What about the fact that he has way less muscle, no toes, feet, or ankles (which are all critical for balance and for sensing distances and terrain), and that his body is being stressed in ways not intended. These are huge, obvious disadvantages, and I don't see why they're seemingly ignored. Sure, the prosthetics can vary in mechanical advantage, but you could just regulate those like any other sports equipment. But to say that not having legs could even possibly be unfair for running is ridiculous and a bit offensive.

karamazov 14y ago
What if, instead of legs, he had electric wheels capable of going 30 miles per hour? That would be a clear advantage.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
watty 14y ago
I think part of the skepticism is that it's far more likely that these carbon fiber legs are advantageous making a naturally fast runner become world caliber as opposed to the fastest man in the world having a great disadvantage causing him to only become world caliber. There are scientists on both sides of the issue as well, so all we have is opinions. I'm no expert but my guess is that if Usain Bolt had been wearing these and training his whole life he would not only hold the world record, he would have destroyed it and would not count. Edit: BUT, there's no question in my mind that they are not "equal" to a human legs. There are clear advantages and disadvantages of them. I refuse to believe that the designers who were trying to make them as fast as possible just happened to create legs that were 100% equivalent to human legs. It's IMO not fair for Oscar or other Olympians but it's not his fault he has no one else to compete against.
ramblerman 14y ago
> But to say that not having legs could even possibly be unfair for running is ridiculous and a bit offensive. I'd say the offense is yours, by taking this argument down to that level and appealing for pity and emotions rather than an objective decision. If anything amputees or disabled people want to be on par with the people around them. Treat this as you would any other argument.

karamazov 14y ago

What if, instead of legs, he had electric wheels capable of going 30 miles per hour? That would be a clear advantage.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

watty 14y ago

I think part of the skepticism is that it's far more likely that these carbon fiber legs are advantageous making a naturally fast runner become world caliber as opposed to the fastest man in the world having a great disadvantage causing him to only become world caliber. There are scientists on both sides of the issue as well, so all we have is opinions. I'm no expert but my guess is that if Usain Bolt had been wearing these and training his whole life he would not only hold the world record, he would have destroyed it and would not count. Edit: BUT, there's no question in my mind that they are not "equal" to a human legs. There are clear advantages and disadvantages of them. I refuse to believe that the designers who were trying to make them as fast as possible just happened to create legs that were 100% equivalent to human legs. It's IMO not fair for Oscar or other Olympians but it's not his fault he has no one else to compete against.

ramblerman 14y ago

> But to say that not having legs could even possibly be unfair for running is ridiculous and a bit offensive. I'd say the offense is yours, by taking this argument down to that level and appealing for pity and emotions rather than an objective decision. If anything amputees or disabled people want to be on par with the people around them. Treat this as you would any other argument.