Should this guy able to compete against normal people?

I say no. But he has a great chance in the Paralympics....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

yes

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Thank you for the detailed reasoning.

Could you also explain why I can't duct tape springs to my leg and compete???

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You chastise him for not giving detailed reasoning, yet your own reasoning for wanting him banned amounts to "He straps springs to his legs." Would you care to elaborate on that?

You know what? I'll save you the trouble. There is no scientific evidence that he has a net advantage over able-bodied runners. The tests they conducted that resulted in his initial ban in 2007 only measured him in straight lines after the initial acceleration, for the stated purpose that the committee was "looking for advantages, not disadvantages." No one has been able to prove that he has any metabolic advantage, and his split times indicate that while he seems to have an advantage in straight lines, he's at a disadvantage off the blocks and in the turns than able-bodied runners. These factors are why the ban was overturned and he was allowed to compete in the Olympics.

So the answer is yes, he should absolutely be able to compete in able-bodied events.

 

He has no advantages. If my vote counted I would vote YES he should be allowed to be in the Olympics. If the situation allows..

 

Then we should sign him up for the army or maybe being a firefigther. Oh wait...

 

If he wins, he has advantage. If he loses, now why would he want to compete in the first place???

But since you wanted an argument, because the spring legs ALTER his body so much so that, well see the previous 2 sentences. His legs are most likely lighter than a normal leg, they don't get tired,hurt,etc. so yes, there are advantages. Tell me this: will he ever get a cramp in his foot?

This blows my mind, that a comittee came up with the scientic explanation that he has no advantage. Well, first they need more guys like him to be able to give a statistically signifficant and valid answer.
h
But for fun, let's say he wins. Then how would we evaluate his record??? Put an asterisk next to it??

 

Other then trench walking (which I don't think we do anymore). Why couldn't he be in the Army?

 

He can't wear the standard issue boots...

 

I don't think any possible advantages of the blades outweigh the benefits of having complete legs. Go ahead and put springs on your legs, it won't help or everyone would put springs in running shoes.

 

Will one of the springs or brackets break while he is running? That has as much of a chance as a cramp to a well trained athlete.

 

Why's that? I'm sure he could get those boots on and adjusted to be nice and tight

 

I'm sorry, how does it follow that if he wins, he has an advantage? That makes no sense whatsoever.

Again, the testing he submitted to did not agree with your layman assessment.

It seems to me that you don't really care whether or not he has an advantage. That you contrast him with "normal people", and your inability to accept that the science doesn't back up your claim, suggests something more deep-seeded and sinister at play here.

 

Yes, he's not normal, but so what?

 

Don't discriminate him, or disqualify him. Just because he is a little different. We are all different. An for the record there are some in the military who are. Missing a leg.

 

Come on, let's not pretend we don't know what she's insinuating here. The pretense of this thread (and I believe it is only a pretense) is that his prostheses give him an unfair advantage over other runners. This turns out not to be the case, but that's the question she's raising. And it is a valid one, when not informed by some resentment or fear of handicapped people as hers so clearly is.

 

Where is this guy from? What's his name? There is a reason he is there representing his country. An he is I am guessing the most qualified they have to represent. He most likely won't win. But that's not the point. He is there for his country....

 

You're still missing the point. The argument is that he should be disqualified for having an unfair advantage. As it happens, he already lost (I believe he finished last in his semi-final heat) but that's not the point.