Re: Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments?

[Guest guest]

Hi .

Being blind I've found in powerlifting an activity I can do that I need no

assistance in performing other than being guided to the monolift, bench, and

platform and , if I'm good enough to receive an award. I'd sent my picture

deadlifting out to many people, including you pulling my last best lift in my

first meet this year. A friend sent the picture to the United States Blind

Athletics Association. Although I appreciated their call asking me to come to

Florida to compete and, they are a great organization, I turned them down. I

really didn't want to make something I love into something more tied to

blindness when I'd rather forget about it as often as I can. I'm now 51 years

old. My weight lifting

Life over the past 37 years, the last 15 being very visually impaired provide

for me something akin to what the religious feel they gain from going to church.

I don't have to be blind in the gym. Granted, I must navigate and do things

slowly in moving things around etc but my strength can't be minimized by my

needing to use that white cane.

What I'm trying to say is, all I've ever wanted out of life is to be happy

and do what I want just like everyone else does except, I'm driven to go beyond

even that.

I believe loves running just like I love lifting. I also absolutely

know that wants to escape the confines society builds in stigma around

being handicapped. With all the controversy, how can be mormal? Will

society allow him to do what once was thought impossible for an amputee?

Are those of us who have some sort of physical challenge always have to be

relegated to " special " games to perform our activities?

Our fight against stigma, real or perceived is drawn from fear. The " able

bodied " cannot imagine how they themselves could function given hurdles like

blindness, amputation, etc.

I absolutely don't have the answer to the questions surrounding the issues

faces but, I do know he's a human being with a yearning to do what he

loves trying to make sense of the cards he's been dealt.

Carson Wood.

Westbrook, ME USA.

Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments?

A man much previously discussed on our board is now entered in two running

events at the Summer Games.

For discussion, I'd like to ask our group a couple of questions:

1. Will inclusion of and his blades end up impairing the Special

Olympics and the other special Games for those with physical and mental

challenges by encouraging such entrants to pass up them up for the mainstream?

2. Are the blades themselves " fair " against the meat feet and legs of the

other competitors? There has been some discussion about the energy savings and

other concerns - that the blades are more " springy " and possibly " better " than

meat feet/legs?

3. If you believe the blades are " fair " for running events, would you also

believe they retain that " fairness " if you were to see them entered in the high

jump or other more " springy " events? Would they be an " unfair " advantage in say,

high hurtles as well?

4. If ends up defeating the non-challenged entrants (the non bladed

entrants), what do you believe will be the result of this and do you think it

will result in a ban? Court challenges as to the " fairness " of the entry?

My personal opinion is that although shoes have been changing and improving

over time, they do not account for the springy nature of the blades, nor do they

account for the lack of energy expenditure or oxygen debt that limbs do. We

penalize many means of changing one's energy profile - like blood doping, etc.

While the entrant is fast enough and will bring a great deal of attention to the

events, I'm not sure it will be a continued feature of the games, that the

inclusion may encourage some attempts to mimic the effect of the blades by way

of devices not currently allowed or other means yet to be determined. That

athletes without blades may find themselves behind someone with what was

previously considered a disadvantage in sport and become desperate to keep

up...any way they can. Gold medals mean money and livelihood, sometimes for the

family of the winner for life in many countries. There's too much at stake...

I look forward to reading the discussion and see what really happens with this

amazing athlete and the Games themselves.

the Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

[Guest guest]

Hi !

Good to hear from you!

My kids still refer to you as the " Deadlift Diva " That is a cool nickname!

I think the OP story has divided the research community, at least there are

disagreement among the seven who were originally involved in testing

Pistorius relative to the what the blades were allowing him to do.

Two of the members of that research team ( Weyand and Matt Bundle)

have never backed off their position regarding what their data show relative

to Pistorius's swing time--an indication of a clear advantage.

However, the facts behind the CAS ruling really have been misreported to

the point that Bundle/Weyand issued the following in an effort to present

the actual facts.

Misreported Incorrect Item 1 - The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)

ruled that Mr. Pistorius’ artificial limbs DO NOT provide an advantage vs.

intact limbs during sprint running.

Fact – The publicly available ruling of the CAS indicates that the issue

the court considered was whether the specific eligibility ban imposed on Mr.

Pistorius by the IAAF was scientifically valid or not.

Fact - The court DID NOT rule “no advantage†for Mr. Pistorius. Rather,

the court overturned the IAAF’s eligibility ban due to the inadequate

supporting evidence offered by the IAAF. In the very ruling that overturned the

ban, the CAS specifically pointed out that Mr. Pistorius blades may, in fact,

provide a competitive advantage.

Misreported Incorrect Item 2 – Bundle and Weyand testified

before the CAS that the artificial limbs of Pistorius DO NOT PROVIDE a

competitive advantage and at a later time reversed themselves and stated

that Mr. Pistorius’ artificial limbs DO PROVIDE an advantage.

Fact – First, neither of us were present at the CAS hearing. Second, since

we first reviewed the data obtained in Dr Weyand’s laboratory in the

spring of 2008 we have been completely consistent in our public and scientific

communications in stating:

1) The scientific rationale put forth by the IAAF leading to Pistorius’

ban in 2007, was not valid, and

2) The entirely distinct data that we collected and published with Drs.

Herr, Kram and others, indicate that the carbon fiber prostheses worn by Mr.

Pistorius provide major competitive advantages vs. biological limbs.

Misreported Incorrect Item 3 – The 11.9 second advantage over 400-meters

provided to Mr. Pistorius by his artificial limbs is a “back of the envelope

calculation†that has never been peer-reviewed.

Fact – All of the data used to quantify the advantage that Mr. Pistorius’

blades provide was published after peer-review and with Drs. Herr and Kram

as co-authors. These data first appeared in an original manuscript that

was published in the print version of the Journal of Applied Physiology in

April 2009.

A second peer-reviewed paper presented the analysis that used the

previously published data to quantify Mr. Pistorius’ 11.9 second advantage

over

400-meter race. This second manuscript was a point/counterpoint contribution

that also appeared in the Journal of Applied Physiology. The peer review of

this second manuscript was conducted in accordance with the Journal’s

policy as described on its website:

“Articles in the pro-and-con series are subject to peer-review by the

editor and editorial consultants, and acceptance cannot be guaranteed in

advance.â€

Our point/counterpoint manuscript was reviewed and accepted by the former

editor-in-chief of the Journal.

The two quantitative relationships used to determine the magnitude of Mr.

Pistorius’ advantage first appeared in respective papers published in 2000

and 2003. The supporting data bases in the original and subsequent papers

include hundreds of all-out running trials that validated the accuracy of

these relationships to within 3.5% or less.

Misunderstood Item 4 – Why did Weyand and Bundle wait until

18 months after the CAS Hearing to make their conclusions public?

Answer 4 – Because doing so was the only responsible, fair and

scientifically credible way to disseminate our research findings that Mr.

Pistorius’

artificial limbs do indeed provide a major competitive advantage.

The least responsible course of action would have been to release our

advantage conclusion without: 1) the supporting data and analysis, and 2)

without peer review by other scientists. Early public release of our conclusion

without data, a supporting analysis and peer-review would have brought about

confusion for all, been unfair to Mr. Pistorius, other athletes, policy

makers, and the public. This course also would have violated the well-founded

conventions for the ethical, responsible dissemination of scientific

information and conclusions.

One result of the scientific disagreement among researchers working on the

Pistorius project was that the peer-review publication process necessarily

involved two steps, a first publication authored by all that introduced the

relevant data, and a second in which we were able to publish our advantage

analysis and conclusions alongside an alternative conclusion offered by

Drs. Kram and Herr. Because each round of the peer-review process typically

takes a minimum of one to two months after the lengthy process of manuscript

preparation, we were fortunate to publish the two papers as quickly as we

did. "

I hope this helps. I've had an interest/involvment in double BTK amputees

since former paralympic champion Tony Volptentest compteted on my school

track here in Lisle back in '97--years before Pistorius and his carbon fiber

blades became an issue.

Respectfully,

Ken Jakalski

Lisle Senior High School

Lisle, IL USA

[Guest guest]

deadliftdiva wrote:

> 1. Will inclusion of and his blades end up impairing the Special

Olympics and the other special Games for those with physical and mental

challenges....

Hi , interesting topic.

For those not familiar with the " other special Games, " the Paralympic Games are

for those who have physical disabilities. In order to compete in the Paralympic

Games, an athlete has to meet both national and international performance

standards.

Just my $0.02--The world of " adapted sport " exists to enable the disabled to

participate and compete in sports. If a person has a disability but is able to

compete with those who are not disabled, and if the governing body of the sport

allows such a person to do so, then great. For disabled athletes who want to

compare their performances with those of other athletes who have comparable

disabilities, adapted sport is the way to go.

FWIW, my wife was a middle-disance track athlete who enjoyed competing in open

college and masters meets. She was, and remains, visually impaired and uses a

cane or guide dog to get around town, so she used a guide runner when she

competed on the track. She also competed in four Paralympic Games in the T-12

classification and ran in other track meets for the visually impaired, such as

those sponsored by the International Blind Sports Ass'n (IBSA) and the United

States Association of Blind Athletes.

Regards,

[Guest guest]

Hi and all

I have wondered about this for some time and these are my current musings

on the subject. Since hails from my neck of the woods I am absorbed

by his story. For me it comes in several parts. My coach has been the

Para olympic coach for the SA powerlifting at the Olympics including

Sydney, Athens and Bejing, and his association with the paraolympic teams

perhaps gives me some insight, perhaps not.

Firstly only just qualified for this event, he is unlikely to beat

many, if he progresses past his heat this will be an oustanding achievement.

The science seems to say that the blades give him an advantage* in a race*,

mainly no fatigue in returning energy at top speed running , however his

start is compromised as he does not have the calf muscles and foot

extension to help generate starting forces and as with all athletes there

is no energy to return at that stage of the race. In the wet s

acceleration is very poor (thinking of London weather I wonder about

this). But advantage or not for for me what that argument neglects to

cover is that competing at the higher levels and running fast in a race is

only possible through hard training and the ability to recover from the

training. Its hard to quantify but I watch the paraolympic athletes who

train at our gym (bench pressers mostly) and life for them is hard much

harder than for able body athletes, everything from going to the toilet to

getting into bed is hard. The organisms ability to recover is compromised

by the level of other stressors. This compromises the athletes ability to

recover. Meaning that training is less effective (relatively). Although

is well adapted to his life, his life is just that much harder to get

through daily than is an able bodied athlete, suffers from

compromised training recovery in the same way that a clean athlete suffers

relative to a drug assisted athlete. I remember reading a post on this

site last year about sleep deprivation leading to a significant, about 20%

loss in performance and recovery (if memory serves me correctly) it struck

me that for the para athletes there whole life is compromised and recovery

compromised may equate to a loss in performance similar in magnitude, pure

speculation of course, but I think a worthy discussion topic.

I think of a fellow gym rat who at the worlds last year the day before he

was due to compete suffered from a pressure sore, an affliction suffered by

wheel chair bound people. He was unable to compete (he may have medaled

given his gym lifts) and since then he has spent over 6months in hospital

with repeated skin grafts and operations. He has not been able to train

even. This is an extreme situation, and perhaps overly dramatic but I

think that it reiterates the point about how much harder life is for

athletes with disability.

Finally what do sports represent and why do we love to watch sports for me

it shows people's finer traits namely the ability of people to overcome

adversity, hard work, fairness in competition and these are an inspiration

to us all. For me is each of those, some may contest fairness, but

for me his participation is fair and above all inspirational.

Regards

Nick Tatalias

Johannesburg

South Africa

On 5 July 2012 21:29, <deadliftdiva@...> wrote:

> **

>

>

> A man much previously discussed on our board is now entered in two running

> events at the Summer Games.

>

> For discussion, I'd like to ask our group a couple of questions:

>

> 1. Will inclusion of and his blades end up impairing the Special

> Olympics and the other special Games for those with physical and mental

> challenges by encouraging such entrants to pass up them up for the

> mainstream?

>

> 2. Are the blades themselves " fair " against the meat feet and legs of the

> other competitors? There has been some discussion about the energy savings

> and other concerns - that the blades are more " springy " and possibly

> " better " than meat feet/legs?

>

> 3. If you believe the blades are " fair " for running events, would you also

> believe they retain that " fairness " if you were to see them entered in the

> high jump or other more " springy " events? Would they be an " unfair "

> advantage in say, high hurtles as well?

>

> 4. If ends up defeating the non-challenged entrants (the non bladed

> entrants), what do you believe will be the result of this and do you think

> it will result in a ban? Court challenges as to the " fairness " of the

> entry?

>

> My personal opinion is that although shoes have been changing and

> improving over time, they do not account for the springy nature of the

> blades, nor do they account for the lack of energy expenditure or oxygen

> debt that limbs do. We penalize many means of changing one's energy profile

> - like blood doping, etc. While the entrant is fast enough and will bring a

> great deal of attention to the events, I'm not sure it will be a continued

> feature of the games, that the inclusion may encourage some attempts to

> mimic the effect of the blades by way of devices not currently allowed or

> other means yet to be determined. That athletes without blades may find

> themselves behind someone with what was previously considered a

> disadvantage in sport and become desperate to keep up...any way they can.

> Gold medals mean money and livelihood, sometimes for the family of the

> winner for life in many countries. There's too much at stake...

>

> I look forward to reading the discussion and see what really happens with

> this amazing athlete and the Games themselves.

>

> the Phantom

> aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

> Denver, Colorado, USA

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Ken - good to hear from you Still deadlifting over here, so that's still

my nick. I've also read and agreed with a good portion of Carson's posting as

to the opportunity of choosing to compete with the regular sport or the special

one set aside for those with special challenges.

Amazing return posts, very enlightening, thank you for putting the research

synopsis quite well and understandable. Yours and Carson's post put the two

major sides of this question of 's competing in the main Olympic Games in

the true frame it should be in - the two main questions we have now are:

1. Is it fair to non amputees who do not have the same technology (proven to be

a major advantage by the researchers and not replicated by existing shoes or

other aids to a non amputee - that without the same blade technology, the able

bodied athletes are in a serious disadvantage over the duration of the 400

meters. The times he is putting up are 2 seconds slower than

(USA) WR holder - but faster than the entrant from Great Britain by nearly 1.5

seconds.

2. Is it a problem for the ParaOlympic Games and other organizations that aid

the athlete whose will to win is great despite having obstacles to overcome and

adapt to in order to compete?

With regard to question 1 - the evidence may be more clear after Ken's post and

the actual running times of the athlete in question that there may be some

advantage - or that he has learned to make the blades an advantage. Another good

question is whether or not the athlete has experienced disruption of training

due to the question of whether he would be permitted to compete, or other

factors as the large press interest in the story. His experience at a full

Worlds level is also possibly one of the questions as to his performance in the

Olympic Games - he has run a quick enough race at 45.07 seconds to qualify for

Games.

The further question is whether an athlete with such challenges has an advantage

over the non amputee athletes. It is here I disagree, respectfully, with Carson

on his comparison to the participation in PL meets as a sight challenged lifter.

I have actually participated in a dual meet that was for several years held in

Denver, Colorado, with the USBAA PL Nationals and a state level PL competition

for sighted athletes. What I have generally observed is that although loss of

sight presented a significant challenge in many activities, that many of the

USBAA athletes were quite strong and some were quite capable of competing

against sighted and quite competitive PL here. One athlete in particular was

competing in the deadlift - and the bar was rolling away - he helicoptered 600

lbs at under 200 lbs bodyweight and seemed to still be strong enough to lift

more - there was a gasp from some onlookers as we were aware of how strong that

young man really was....and he lacked the experience along with the sight not to

try such a feat.

Were athletes to perform with an artificial limb that contributed infinitely

better grasp of the bar - or one that caused a springy return of the bar up from

the chest - say a " hand blade " that caused a loading and rebounding of a bar

with more weight, this would then be questioned by those athletes without such

an advantage.

So for a runner with a sight issue to run in a regular race, were they able to

do so - I would not have the same question but agree with Carson that he should

be permitted to enter, provided he would run in his lane somehow and make the

same turns and other general requirements of the race as the other athletes do -

as Carson clearly does in PL.

The questions remain both about the athlete's base talent before the blades are

added and then what would happen if someone made the most of the blades - say

you then ran against at his peak - would it prove an advantage

if equally gifted athletes ran against each other? Did the blades make an

average athlete into an exceptional one?

By his time, he properly should be included in the Olympic Games. But there are

also athletes quicker than those without an impairment who are much faster than

those who have regular legs - this argument might also serve to say " wheelchair

runners should be allowed to compete in regular road races " . Some athletes with

clear disadvantage in other activities are actually superior at some of the PL

moves - for example, those with abnormally short legs may be gifted at the

squat, or abnormally short arms, the bench press...and also be in a far lighter

weight class on top of it all, due to their otherwise shortened limbs. Generally

with amputees in PL, there are formulas used to adjust the athlete into the

proper weight class, that is, to add back the weight estimated to be represented

by the missing meat limb - to attempt to level the playing field. Thus the

athlete may compete against their peers if they wish to in the regular PL

federations.

We are left to await the results of the races and the continuing consideration

of whether it aids or injures the organizations who have made a good job of

providing opportunity where it was not provided before for those who face daily

challenges in their lives. Will the attention help the organizations who gave

this athlete his start or hamper them by making other athletes wish to go to the

mainstream events, along with funding?

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Re: Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments?

Hi !

Good to hear from you!

My kids still refer to you as the " Deadlift Diva " That is a cool nickname!

I think the OP story has divided the research community, at least there are

disagreement among the seven who were originally involved in testing

Pistorius relative to the what the blades were allowing him to do.

Two of the members of that research team ( Weyand and Matt Bundle)

have never backed off their position regarding what their data show relative

to Pistorius's swing time--an indication of a clear advantage.

However, the facts behind the CAS ruling really have been misreported to

the point that Bundle/Weyand issued the following in an effort to present

the actual facts.

Misreported Incorrect Item 1 - The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)

ruled that Mr. Pistorius’ artificial limbs DO NOT provide an advantage vs.

intact limbs during sprint running.

Fact – The publicly available ruling of the CAS indicates that the issue

the court considered was whether the specific eligibility ban imposed on Mr.

Pistorius by the IAAF was scientifically valid or not.

Fact - The court DID NOT rule “no advantage†for Mr. Pistorius. Rather,

the court overturned the IAAF’s eligibility ban due to the inadequate

supporting evidence offered by the IAAF. In the very ruling that overturned the

ban, the CAS specifically pointed out that Mr. Pistorius blades may, in fact,

provide a competitive advantage.

Misreported Incorrect Item 2 – Bundle and Weyand testified

before the CAS that the artificial limbs of Pistorius DO NOT PROVIDE a

competitive advantage and at a later time reversed themselves and stated

that Mr. Pistorius’ artificial limbs DO PROVIDE an advantage.

Fact – First, neither of us were present at the CAS hearing. Second, since

we first reviewed the data obtained in Dr Weyand’s laboratory in the

spring of 2008 we have been completely consistent in our public and scientific

communications in stating:

1) The scientific rationale put forth by the IAAF leading to Pistorius’

ban in 2007, was not valid, and

2) The entirely distinct data that we collected and published with Drs.

Herr, Kram and others, indicate that the carbon fiber prostheses worn by Mr.

Pistorius provide major competitive advantages vs. biological limbs.

Misreported Incorrect Item 3 – The 11.9 second advantage over 400-meters

provided to Mr. Pistorius by his artificial limbs is a “back of the envelope

calculation†that has never been peer-reviewed.

Fact – All of the data used to quantify the advantage that Mr. Pistorius’

blades provide was published after peer-review and with Drs. Herr and Kram

as co-authors. These data first appeared in an original manuscript that

was published in the print version of the Journal of Applied Physiology in

April 2009.

A second peer-reviewed paper presented the analysis that used the

previously published data to quantify Mr. Pistorius’ 11.9 second advantage

over

400-meter race. This second manuscript was a point/counterpoint contribution

that also appeared in the Journal of Applied Physiology. The peer review of

this second manuscript was conducted in accordance with the Journal’s

policy as described on its website:

“Articles in the pro-and-con series are subject to peer-review by the

editor and editorial consultants, and acceptance cannot be guaranteed in

advance.â€

Our point/counterpoint manuscript was reviewed and accepted by the former

editor-in-chief of the Journal.

The two quantitative relationships used to determine the magnitude of Mr.

Pistorius’ advantage first appeared in respective papers published in 2000

and 2003. The supporting data bases in the original and subsequent papers

include hundreds of all-out running trials that validated the accuracy of

these relationships to within 3.5% or less.

Misunderstood Item 4 – Why did Weyand and Bundle wait until

18 months after the CAS Hearing to make their conclusions public?

Answer 4 – Because doing so was the only responsible, fair and

scientifically credible way to disseminate our research findings that Mr.

Pistorius’

artificial limbs do indeed provide a major competitive advantage.

The least responsible course of action would have been to release our

advantage conclusion without: 1) the supporting data and analysis, and 2)

without peer review by other scientists. Early public release of our conclusion

without data, a supporting analysis and peer-review would have brought about

confusion for all, been unfair to Mr. Pistorius, other athletes, policy

makers, and the public. This course also would have violated the well-founded

conventions for the ethical, responsible dissemination of scientific

information and conclusions.

One result of the scientific disagreement among researchers working on the

Pistorius project was that the peer-review publication process necessarily

involved two steps, a first publication authored by all that introduced the

relevant data, and a second in which we were able to publish our advantage

analysis and conclusions alongside an alternative conclusion offered by

Drs. Kram and Herr. Because each round of the peer-review process typically

takes a minimum of one to two months after the lengthy process of manuscript

preparation, we were fortunate to publish the two papers as quickly as we

did. "

I hope this helps. I've had an interest/involvment in double BTK amputees

since former paralympic champion Tony Volptentest compteted on my school

track here in Lisle back in '97--years before Pistorius and his carbon fiber

blades became an issue.

Respectfully,

Ken Jakalski

Lisle Senior High School

Lisle, IL USA

[Guest guest]

Hi Nick!

In a message dated 7/10/2012 8:56:51 A.M. Central Daylight Time,

nick.tatalias@... writes:

The science seems to say that the blades give him an advantage* in a

race*,

mainly no fatigue in returning energy at top speed running

You are indeed accurate that a couple of the Rice researchers did find the

blades conferring an advantage. However, the Anerobic Speed Reserve tests

performed at Rice did not show Pistorius fatiguing any differently than

able bodied sprinters.

“Based on the data,†says Weyand, “the blades do not confer an enhanced

ability to hold speed over a 400m race. "

So, the controversy involves another research finding.

Here is the public statement issued by Weyand/Bundle back in September of

2011:

" The sprinting mechanics of Pistorius: Because the artificial lower

limbs of Mr. Pistorius weigh only half as much as an intact lower-limb, he

is not bounded by the swing time minimum that applies to athletes with

biological limbs. Mr. Pistorius can reposition his lightweight, artificial

limbs in 0.28 seconds, and therefore 20% more rapidly than most intact-limb

athletes. To appreciate just how artificial Mr. Pistorius’ swing time is,

consider that the average limb repositioning time of six former 100-meter world

record holders (Ben , Carl , Donovan , Maurice Greene,

Tim Montgomery, and Gatlin) is 0.34 seconds. Mr. Pistorius’ limb

repositioning times are 15.7% more brief than six of the fastest male sprinters

in recorded human history.

Reduced limb repositioning times allow Mr. Pistorius to spend less time in

the air between steps. Shorter aerial periods, in turn, substantially

reduce how hard Mr. Pistorius must hit the ground during each stance period to

lift and move his body forward into the next step. Hence, the net effect of

lightweight prosthetic limbs that artificially reduce the swing and aerial

phases of the stride is to substantially reduce how hard Mr. Pistorius

must hit the ground to run at the same speeds as his intact-limb competitors.

In this sense, the level of sprinting athleticism required for Mr.

Pistorius to achieve world class speeds is dramatically reduced compared to his

intact limb competitors. Mr. Pistorius attains world-class sprinting speeds

with the ground forces and foot-ground contact times of a slow and

relatively uncompetitive runner. Mr. Pistorius’ intact-limb competitors, with

natural limb weights and swing times, lack this option, and therefore must

achieve their speeds via exclusively biological means. Mr. Pistorius, in

contrast, achieves these speeds through the use of technology.

Indeed, the gait anomalies of Mr. Pistorius are so large that they can be

observed with a moderately experienced eye. Mr. Pistorius, like slow

intact-limb runners, spends the majority of his race time on the ground while

his

competitors, in contrast, spend the majority of their race time in the

air. "

Ken Jakalski

Lisle High School

Lisle, IL USA

[Guest guest]

Hi Nick and thank you for the post .

I think the point of adversity in daily life is a good point to raise when we

examine the inclusion of the physically challenged athlete into the mainstream

sport. But if we also examine what makes us admire athletes that we select to

admire - sometimes it's the performance, sometimes it's the personality or

appearance, and sometimes it's the personal adversity or challenge the athlete

has overcome to be there. The media gives us the background of athletes at the

Games and shows us this one has lost a mother or father, this one has overcome a

severe illness, or this one has overcome economic challenges to be here. The

very journey to the Games is one of trial and challenge to your body, mind,

values and other things that make us admire the athletes who arrive there.

Sleep disruption which you raise is a common problem in peaking training for

many athletes overall and women of a certain age in particular function through

their daily lives for decades through this particular malfunction (note this is

HUMOR, people... from a 51 yo woman). I am by no means minimizing the

physical inconveniences you cite - I'm just relating that women on a whole tend

to get less sleep it seems throughout our lives, training at a high level just

makes it happen to a greater extent in my experience... I recall reading that

some scientists believe the night before is not as critical to performance, but

2 nights out. I've also been around other athletes who slept poorly, failed to

eat breakfast as they were the sort to hurl violently if they did, and yet

competed quite ably. Again, not as severe as a physical disability, but we could

wonder if they would do better athletically on a full night's sleep and proper

food.

We could also wonder how the athlete would perform without their disability....

without the disability, would be quick enough to be invited to the Games?

Without the disability, would be spurred to train hard? Would he have the

same motivation? Without the blades, would have a Nike (trademarked etc)

contract? That one is " probably not " .

I looked up the entry from Great Britain and compared times with 's - and

GB's about 1.5 seconds slower. Does this mean he should not be present at the

Games? No, clearly. Is his time slow? Yes, compared to 's best and the

WR....but then nobody's coming close to that WR at present? There is no

out there with golden shoes at present... even if does not advance

out of his heat, he still has participated and that leaves all the questions

open.

The physical disability and its side effects to training and daily life do have

a significant effect on the athlete and are of serious consideration, the

increased vulnerability to infection or the problems of heat moderation with

some athletes in this situation as well (inability to properly get rid of heat

can also cause more dehydration and increase injury potential in some sports

like PL as well as the endurance sports). Accommodation of bench pressers with

disability is now fairly common with a wider bench platform and a strap for

stabilization plus assistance on and off the bench into position as needed. No

restriction against attempting the open records, and a special record set

against their peers in recognition of the challenges of the physically

challenged athlete.

Recently USAPL women's nationals included a woman with one leg who performed the

full meet, including the squat. Performing what essentially was a single legged

back squat to the depth required below parallel is one of superior balance as

well as the will to compete... coaching someone with both legs intact is

challenge enough to anyone who has worked with newbies in PL, let alone the

spotting and other considerations with an athlete using a single leg. In

addition to the usual hazards of someone failing a lift forward, backward, or

not coming up, you have the potential of losing the athlete and the bar

sideways...a rare event for those on 2 legs.

Lastly, I think you do raise a considerable point of the blades on a wet track,

and this is London. His times have also varied more than you might otherwise

expect and the nerves of racing at this level vs. his experience and the huge

media presence will also be interesting factors. My understanding is also that

with any prosthetic device, there can be irritation of the junction and other

fitting issues that can vary and it would be likely that fit is critical with

the blades for best performance.

Can it also be possible that the surface/style of the track also may have an

impact on blade performance? That perhaps laboratory conditions being most

advantageous for the blade performance may not be achievable in the field? Say

the friction coefficient being proper for best push off and other factors vs the

reality of wet tracks, different conditions (like boards indoors for example -

would he be able to maintain traction on an indoor track at his best pace

coupled with a steeper curve?). Would the blade in future have a sort of 'tread'

or a 'shoe' that would be changeable like the length of a spike or the shoes

another athlete might use for the conditions? Would the IOC and track overlords

(the international federation) put a limit on the blade to prohibit any personal

modifications or other advantages? Shoes and other devices used by conventional

athletes must be provided for inspection if there are questions...other ways of

adding to one's abilities are strictly monitored or controlled by testing...

Thanks again for the excellent discussion and we shall see what happens!

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Re: Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments?

Hi and all

I have wondered about this for some time and these are my current musings

on the subject. Since hails from my neck of the woods I am absorbed

by his story. For me it comes in several parts. My coach has been the

Para olympic coach for the SA powerlifting at the Olympics including

Sydney, Athens and Bejing, and his association with the paraolympic teams

perhaps gives me some insight, perhaps not.

Firstly only just qualified for this event, he is unlikely to beat

many, if he progresses past his heat this will be an oustanding achievement.

The science seems to say that the blades give him an advantage* in a race*,

mainly no fatigue in returning energy at top speed running , however his

start is compromised as he does not have the calf muscles and foot

extension to help generate starting forces and as with all athletes there

is no energy to return at that stage of the race. In the wet s

acceleration is very poor (thinking of London weather I wonder about

this). But advantage or not for for me what that argument neglects to

cover is that competing at the higher levels and running fast in a race is

only possible through hard training and the ability to recover from the

training. Its hard to quantify but I watch the paraolympic athletes who

train at our gym (bench pressers mostly) and life for them is hard much

harder than for able body athletes, everything from going to the toilet to

getting into bed is hard. The organisms ability to recover is compromised

by the level of other stressors. This compromises the athletes ability to

recover. Meaning that training is less effective (relatively). Although

is well adapted to his life, his life is just that much harder to get

through daily than is an able bodied athlete, suffers from

compromised training recovery in the same way that a clean athlete suffers

relative to a drug assisted athlete. I remember reading a post on this

site last year about sleep deprivation leading to a significant, about 20%

loss in performance and recovery (if memory serves me correctly) it struck

me that for the para athletes there whole life is compromised and recovery

compromised may equate to a loss in performance similar in magnitude, pure

speculation of course, but I think a worthy discussion topic.

I think of a fellow gym rat who at the worlds last year the day before he

was due to compete suffered from a pressure sore, an affliction suffered by

wheel chair bound people. He was unable to compete (he may have medaled

given his gym lifts) and since then he has spent over 6months in hospital

with repeated skin grafts and operations. He has not been able to train

even. This is an extreme situation, and perhaps overly dramatic but I

think that it reiterates the point about how much harder life is for

athletes with disability.

Finally what do sports represent and why do we love to watch sports for me

it shows people's finer traits namely the ability of people to overcome

adversity, hard work, fairness in competition and these are an inspiration

to us all. For me is each of those, some may contest fairness, but

for me his participation is fair and above all inspirational.

Regards

Nick Tatalias

Johannesburg

South Africa

On 5 July 2012 21:29, < deadliftdiva@... > wrote:

> **

>

>

> A man much previously discussed on our board is now entered in two running

> events at the Summer Games.

>

> For discussion, I'd like to ask our group a couple of questions:

>

> 1. Will inclusion of and his blades end up impairing the Special

> Olympics and the other special Games for those with physical and mental

> challenges by encouraging such entrants to pass up them up for the

> mainstream?

>

> 2. Are the blades themselves " fair " against the meat feet and legs of the

> other competitors? There has been some discussion about the energy savings

> and other concerns - that the blades are more " springy " and possibly

> " better " than meat feet/legs?

>

> 3. If you believe the blades are " fair " for running events, would you also

> believe they retain that " fairness " if you were to see them entered in the

> high jump or other more " springy " events? Would they be an " unfair "

> advantage in say, high hurtles as well?

>

> 4. If ends up defeating the non-challenged entrants (the non bladed

> entrants), what do you believe will be the result of this and do you think

> it will result in a ban? Court challenges as to the " fairness " of the

> entry?

>

> My personal opinion is that although shoes have been changing and

> improving over time, they do not account for the springy nature of the

> blades, nor do they account for the lack of energy expenditure or oxygen

> debt that limbs do. We penalize many means of changing one's energy profile

> - like blood doping, etc. While the entrant is fast enough and will bring a

> great deal of attention to the events, I'm not sure it will be a continued

> feature of the games, that the inclusion may encourage some attempts to

> mimic the effect of the blades by way of devices not currently allowed or

> other means yet to be determined. That athletes without blades may find

> themselves behind someone with what was previously considered a

> disadvantage in sport and become desperate to keep up...any way they can.

> Gold medals mean money and livelihood, sometimes for the family of the

> winner for life in many countries. There's too much at stake...

>

> I look forward to reading the discussion and see what really happens with

> this amazing athlete and the Games themselves.

>

> the Phantom

> aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

> Denver, Colorado, USA

>

>

[Guest guest]

Another thing that struck me in reading this is that the blades have less " wind

resistance " than a heavily muscled leg with a shoe on it?

At the level we are examining, all advantage or disadvantage need to be

considered...

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Re: Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments?

Hi Nick!

In a message dated 7/10/2012 8:56:51 A.M. Central Daylight Time,

nick.tatalias@... writes:

The science seems to say that the blades give him an advantage* in a

race*,

mainly no fatigue in returning energy at top speed running

You are indeed accurate that a couple of the Rice researchers did find the

blades conferring an advantage. However, the Anerobic Speed Reserve tests

performed at Rice did not show Pistorius fatiguing any differently than

able bodied sprinters.

“Based on the data,†says Weyand, “the blades do not confer an enhanced

ability to hold speed over a 400m race. "

So, the controversy involves another research finding.

Here is the public statement issued by Weyand/Bundle back in September of

2011:

" The sprinting mechanics of Pistorius: Because the artificial lower

limbs of Mr. Pistorius weigh only half as much as an intact lower-limb, he

is not bounded by the swing time minimum that applies to athletes with

biological limbs. Mr. Pistorius can reposition his lightweight, artificial

limbs in 0.28 seconds, and therefore 20% more rapidly than most intact-limb

athletes. To appreciate just how artificial Mr. Pistorius’ swing time is,

consider that the average limb repositioning time of six former 100-meter world

record holders (Ben , Carl , Donovan , Maurice Greene,

Tim Montgomery, and Gatlin) is 0.34 seconds. Mr. Pistorius’ limb

repositioning times are 15.7% more brief than six of the fastest male sprinters

in recorded human history.

Reduced limb repositioning times allow Mr. Pistorius to spend less time in

the air between steps. Shorter aerial periods, in turn, substantially

reduce how hard Mr. Pistorius must hit the ground during each stance period to

lift and move his body forward into the next step. Hence, the net effect of

lightweight prosthetic limbs that artificially reduce the swing and aerial

phases of the stride is to substantially reduce how hard Mr. Pistorius

must hit the ground to run at the same speeds as his intact-limb competitors.

In this sense, the level of sprinting athleticism required for Mr.

Pistorius to achieve world class speeds is dramatically reduced compared to his

intact limb competitors. Mr. Pistorius attains world-class sprinting speeds

with the ground forces and foot-ground contact times of a slow and

relatively uncompetitive runner. Mr. Pistorius’ intact-limb competitors, with

natural limb weights and swing times, lack this option, and therefore must

achieve their speeds via exclusively biological means. Mr. Pistorius, in

contrast, achieves these speeds through the use of technology.

Indeed, the gait anomalies of Mr. Pistorius are so large that they can be

observed with a moderately experienced eye. Mr. Pistorius, like slow

intact-limb runners, spends the majority of his race time on the ground while

his

competitors, in contrast, spend the majority of their race time in the

air. "

Ken Jakalski

Lisle High School

Lisle, IL USA

[Guest guest]

Ken,

This is very insightful!

Another way (more understandable to me) to interpret the net effect of

higher frequency, is that a leg developing lower peak power is able to

develop higher average power.

Giovanni Ciriani - West Hartford, CT - USA

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 10:30 AM, <CoachJ1@...> wrote:

> **

>

>

> Hi Nick!

>

> In a message dated 7/10/2012 8:56:51 A.M. Central Daylight Time,

> nick.tatalias@... writes:

>

> The science seems to say that the blades give him an advantage* in a

> race*,

> mainly no fatigue in returning energy at top speed running

>

> You are indeed accurate that a couple of the Rice researchers did find the

> blades conferring an advantage. However, the Anerobic Speed Reserve tests

> performed at Rice did not show Pistorius fatiguing any differently than

> able bodied sprinters.

>

> “Based on the data,” says Weyand, “the blades do not confer an enhanced

> ability to hold speed over a 400m race. "

>

> So, the controversy involves another research finding.

>

> Here is the public statement issued by Weyand/Bundle back in September of

> 2011:

>

>

> " The sprinting mechanics of Pistorius: Because the artificial lower

> limbs of Mr. Pistorius weigh only half as much as an intact lower-limb, he

> is not bounded by the swing time minimum that applies to athletes with

> biological limbs. Mr. Pistorius can reposition his lightweight, artificial

> limbs in 0.28 seconds, and therefore 20% more rapidly than most

> intact-limb

> athletes. To appreciate just how artificial Mr. Pistorius’ swing time is,

> consider that the average limb repositioning time of six former 100-meter

> world

> record holders (Ben , Carl , Donovan , Maurice Greene,

> Tim Montgomery, and Gatlin) is 0.34 seconds. Mr. Pistorius’ limb

> repositioning times are 15.7% more brief than six of the fastest male

> sprinters

> in recorded human history.

> Reduced limb repositioning times allow Mr. Pistorius to spend less time in

> the air between steps. Shorter aerial periods, in turn, substantially

> reduce how hard Mr. Pistorius must hit the ground during each stance

> period to

> lift and move his body forward into the next step. Hence, the net effect

> of

> lightweight prosthetic limbs that artificially reduce the swing and aerial

> phases of the stride is to substantially reduce how hard Mr. Pistorius

> must hit the ground to run at the same speeds as his intact-limb

> competitors.

> In this sense, the level of sprinting athleticism required for Mr.

> Pistorius to achieve world class speeds is dramatically reduced compared

> to his

> intact limb competitors. Mr. Pistorius attains world-class sprinting

> speeds

> with the ground forces and foot-ground contact times of a slow and

> relatively uncompetitive runner. Mr. Pistorius’ intact-limb competitors,

> with

> natural limb weights and swing times, lack this option, and therefore must

> achieve their speeds via exclusively biological means. Mr. Pistorius, in

> contrast, achieves these speeds through the use of technology.

> Indeed, the gait anomalies of Mr. Pistorius are so large that they can be

> observed with a moderately experienced eye. Mr. Pistorius, like slow

> intact-limb runners, spends the majority of his race time on the ground

> while his

> competitors, in contrast, spend the majority of their race time in the

> air. "

> Ken Jakalski

> Lisle High School

> Lisle, IL USA

>

>

[Guest guest]

Lost in all the controversy surrounding Pistorius is the fact that

nobody on the Rice research team took a " position " on whether or not he

should be competing in able bodied competition.

As Weyand and Bundle noted in the introduction to their position statement:

" Two aspects of the perspective we bring are relevant. First, we respect

Pistorius for his unique and unprecedented accomplishments as an

athlete and for the general demeanor he has maintained through a protracted,

public and trying ordeal. Second, despite many media reports that we are

“forâ€

Mr. Pistorius, and many others that we are “against†him, we are, in

fact, neither. We have never held an opinion on whether Mr. Pistorius should be

eligible to compete alongside intact-limb athletes or not. As scientists

our role is to provide sound, data-based, conclusions on the basis of our

scholarly expertise and nothing more. Policy decisions, whatever these may or

may not be in response to scientific analysis, are appropriately left to

the policy makers. "

Ken Jakalski

Lisle High School

Lisle, IL USA

[Guest guest]

Really a good point, Ken -

The researchers rightly say they are not the makers of policy, merely the

persons who provide information as to whether the innovation should be allowed

in the sport. The blades are an innovation, just as new shoe technology and

other items which may or may not be permitted by the governing body for the

sport. However, the nature of the blades dictates it is not something ALL

athletes may use or not use at their own discretion, and that is where it

differs from an oxygen tent, or a new shoe.

The media does no service by assigning a motive to the researchers who

apparently did their job properly, as the media reports are varied as to whether

they are " for " or " against " the athlete in question... it cannot have been an

easy task to objectively perform the tests in the face of the controversy and

all the media attention this case has prompted.

the Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Re: Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments?

Lost in all the controversy surrounding Pistorius is the fact that

nobody on the Rice research team took a " position " on whether or not he

should be competing in able bodied competition.

As Weyand and Bundle noted in the introduction to their position statement:

" Two aspects of the perspective we bring are relevant. First, we respect

Pistorius for his unique and unprecedented accomplishments as an

athlete and for the general demeanor he has maintained through a protracted,

public and trying ordeal. Second, despite many media reports that we are

“forâ€

Mr. Pistorius, and many others that we are “against†him, we are, in

fact, neither. We have never held an opinion on whether Mr. Pistorius should be

eligible to compete alongside intact-limb athletes or not. As scientists

our role is to provide sound, data-based, conclusions on the basis of our

scholarly expertise and nothing more. Policy decisions, whatever these may or

may not be in response to scientific analysis, are appropriately left to

the policy makers. "

Ken Jakalski

Lisle High School

Lisle, IL USA

[Guest guest]

wrote:

The blades are an innovation, just as new shoe technology and other items which

may or may not be permitted by the governing body for the sport. However, the

nature of the blades dictates it is not something ALL athletes may use or not

use at their own discretion.

This may sound silly on my part but after reading that sentence I began to

think: what if some one invented a set of strap on blades to be used by able

bodied runners.  Would that confer an advantage to the able bodied athlete?

Ralph Giarnella MD

Southington Ct. USA 

________________________________

From: " deadliftdiva@... " <deadliftdiva@...>

Supertraining

Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 1:13 PM

Subject: Re: Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments?

 

Really a good point, Ken -

The researchers rightly say they are not the makers of policy, merely the

persons who provide information as to whether the innovation should be allowed

in the sport. The blades are an innovation, just as new shoe technology and

other items which may or may not be permitted by the governing body for the

sport. However, the nature of the blades dictates it is not something ALL

athletes may use or not use at their own discretion, and that is where it

differs from an oxygen tent, or a new shoe.

The media does no service by assigning a motive to the researchers who

apparently did their job properly, as the media reports are varied as to whether

they are " for " or " against " the athlete in question... it cannot have been an

easy task to objectively perform the tests in the face of the controversy and

all the media attention this case has prompted.

the Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Re: Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments?

Lost in all the controversy surrounding Pistorius is the fact that

nobody on the Rice research team took a " position " on whether or not he

should be competing in able bodied competition.

As Weyand and Bundle noted in the introduction to their position statement:

" Two aspects of the perspective we bring are relevant. First, we respect

Pistorius for his unique and unprecedented accomplishments as an

athlete and for the general demeanor he has maintained through a protracted,

public and trying ordeal. Second, despite many media reports that we are

“forâ€

Mr. Pistorius, and many others that we are “against†him, we are, in

fact, neither. We have never held an opinion on whether Mr. Pistorius should be

eligible to compete alongside intact-limb athletes or not. As scientists

our role is to provide sound, data-based, conclusions on the basis of our

scholarly expertise and nothing more. Policy decisions, whatever these may or

may not be in response to scientific analysis, are appropriately left to

the policy makers. "

Ken Jakalski

Lisle High School

Lisle, IL USA

[Guest guest]

Ralph,

Whether strap-ob blades would confer an advantage to able-bodied athletes,

would depend on how well these strap-on blades work.

Giovanni Ciriani - West Hartford, CT - USA

On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Ralph Giarnella <ragiarn@...> wrote:

> **

>

>

> wrote:

> The blades are an innovation, just as new shoe technology and other items

> which may or may not be permitted by the governing body for the sport.

> However, the nature of the blades dictates it is not something ALL athletes

> may use or not use at their own discretion.

>

> This may sound silly on my part but after reading that sentence I began to

> think: what if some one invented a set of strap on blades to be used by

> able bodied runners. Would that confer an advantage to the able bodied

> athlete?

>

> Ralph Giarnella MD

> Southington Ct. USA

>

> ________________________________

> From: " deadliftdiva@... " <deadliftdiva@...>

> Supertraining

> Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 1:13 PM

>

> Subject: Re: Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments?

>

>

>

> Really a good point, Ken -

>

> The researchers rightly say they are not the makers of policy, merely the

> persons who provide information as to whether the innovation should be

> allowed in the sport. The blades are an innovation, just as new shoe

> technology and other items which may or may not be permitted by the

> governing body for the sport. However, the nature of the blades dictates it

> is not something ALL athletes may use or not use at their own discretion,

> and that is where it differs from an oxygen tent, or a new shoe.

>

> The media does no service by assigning a motive to the researchers who

> apparently did their job properly, as the media reports are varied as to

> whether they are " for " or " against " the athlete in question... it cannot

> have been an easy task to objectively perform the tests in the face of the

> controversy and all the media attention this case has prompted.

>

> the Phantom

> aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

> Denver, Colorado, USA

>

> Re: Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments?

>

> Lost in all the controversy surrounding Pistorius is the fact that

> nobody on the Rice research team took a " position " on whether or not he

> should be competing in able bodied competition.

>

> As Weyand and Bundle noted in the introduction to their position

> statement:

>

> " Two aspects of the perspective we bring are relevant. First, we respect

> Pistorius for his unique and unprecedented accomplishments as an

> athlete and for the general demeanor he has maintained through a

> protracted,

> public and trying ordeal. Second, despite many media reports that we are

> “forâ€

> Mr. Pistorius, and many others that we are “against†him, we are, in

> fact, neither. We have never held an opinion on whether Mr. Pistorius

> should be

> eligible to compete alongside intact-limb athletes or not. As scientists

> our role is to provide sound, data-based, conclusions on the basis of our

> scholarly expertise and nothing more. Policy decisions, whatever these may

> or

> may not be in response to scientific analysis, are appropriately left to

> the policy makers. "

>

> Ken Jakalski

> Lisle High School

> Lisle, IL USA

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Ralph!

:>This may sound silly on my part but after reading that sentence I began

to think: what if some one invented a set of strap on blades to be used by

able bodied runners. Would that confer an advantage to the able bodied

athlete?

There are all kinds of factors to consider what a spring-like device would

do for an able bodied sprinter.

One of the more significant would be changing limb length.

For example, double below the knee amputees like Pistorius have an

advantage over single leg btk's like Marlon Shirley. The advantage is based on

the fact that a double btk can manipulate the length of the prosthesis, ie.,

run " taller. " This was one of the complaints single btk's like Shirley

suggested Pistorius was doing a few years back.

I know this sounds crazy, but this led to speculation that someone ,

somewhere would turn to a single btk and explore the possibilities of removing

the intact limb, since the double btk would have the ability to adjust limb

length.

Ken Jakalski

Lisle Senior HS (ret)

Lisle, Illinois USA

[Guest guest]

I don't think the question is silly at all. But I think it would not confer the

same benefits to the athlete in some ways - some of the mechanical " advantage "

in the springiness perhaps, but I'd also expect the meat athlete would have more

wind resistance still due to the larger leg muscles for one thing? It might also

be a more " upright " running style?

The latter part isn't as much a worry after seeing succeed with

his unique and very upright style.

I guess this leaves the other question - would a non amputee elite runner be

able to maximize the full potential of a blade footwear? Would the extra

functioning joint (ankle) inhibit its use?

Would also fully meat athletes be able to and possibly rightly petition for the

allowance of a " spring shoe " to " level the playing field " ? A shoe rather than a

blade added onto a shoe - that incorporates a sort of springboard type mechanism

to aid the runner?

When we examine change in a sport, I always think back to the gymnastics -

" women's gymnastics " starting out mostly as a styled dance on the floor exercise

- and then turning more and more into a teenage endeavor of tiny girls with

springloaded floors and double and triple moves... without the spring loaded

floor, the moves are not likely even with the tiny and steely conditioned

athletes we have today.

Is running behind for not adding a similar technology?

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, RMT/CMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Re: Olympic Games Blades Sprinter - Comments?

Lost in all the controversy surrounding Pistorius is the fact that

nobody on the Rice research team took a " position " on whether or not he

should be competing in able bodied competition.

As Weyand and Bundle noted in the introduction to their position statement:

" Two aspects of the perspective we bring are relevant. First, we respect

Pistorius for his unique and unprecedented accomplishments as an

athlete and for the general demeanor he has maintained through a protracted,

public and trying ordeal. Second, despite many media reports that we are

“forâ€

Mr. Pistorius, and many others that we are “against†him, we are, in

fact, neither. We have never held an opinion on whether Mr. Pistorius should be

eligible to compete alongside intact-limb athletes or not. As scientists

our role is to provide sound, data-based, conclusions on the basis of our

scholarly expertise and nothing more. Policy decisions, whatever these may or

may not be in response to scientific analysis, are appropriately left to

the policy makers. "

Ken Jakalski

Lisle High School

Lisle, IL USA

[Guest guest]

RE Pistorius and his blades, the following appears to be the relevant IAAF

regulation. His legal team obviously won his case on the question of

" advantage " .

For the purpose of this Rule the following shall be considered

assistance, and are therefore not allowed:

(f) use of any technical device that incorporates springs, wheels or

any other element that provides the user with an advantage over

another athlete not using such a device.

(g) use of any appliance that has the effect of increasing the

dimension of a piece of equipment beyond the permitted maximum

in the Rules or that provides the user with an advantage which he

would not have obtained using the equipment specified in the

Rules.

Amby Burfoot

Runner's World Magazine

Emmaus PA

[Guest guest]

Hi Ken

This is an endlessly fascinating and layered topic! The science is very

complicated, and while I don't dispute (or pretend to understand) the data, data

still has to be interpreted. If I have understood your post, the interpretation

is that the carbon fibre legs give an 11.9 second advantage over 400m. Is

that an advantage over all other able-bodied athletes (clearly not) or a

(hypothetical) able-bodied version of himself? The truth is we have no way of

knowing how good would have been if he had been born with " normal " legs.

Even if we had a 45-46 second 400m athlete who lost their legs and subsequently

learned to run on the same carbon fibre legs, we would not be comparing like

with like. has never known any other way of walking/running, so his upper

legs are optimized in terms of compensating for the lack of lower limbs and

co-operating with his prosthetics. Perhaps that is why he is the only paralympic

athlete who is right up there with the best of the able-bodied athletes, who

knows? Fortunately/unfortunately there is not much peer data to contextualise

how exceptional he is (I don't want to wish there were more disabled athletes to

compare him to. Slippery slope.)

As a South African and huge fan of 's, something inside me finds it hard to

accept that the research indicates that he would have been a 57 second runner if

he had biological legs. Emotions aside, you will know that sprinting is a highly

complex activity that recruits so many elements of the physiology, that it must

be very hard to isolate the specific contribution of individual links in that

chain. For example, I'm sure you've had athletes on your teams over the years

who look like a million dollars: perfect physiques, height, power to weight

ratio etc, who for some reason just don't have the co-ordination to turn their

physical gifts into speed ;-)

I think the point about is that he is a unique person, in a unique

situation at a specific time in history, and that his inclusion adds interest to

the games and the chance to re-focus on the (real)Olympic spirit and to inspire

many people who might otherwise have become jaded on the topic of super-gifted

professional athletes, many of whom have abused their gifts, and the trust of

the viewing public. As a matter of interest, how conclusive is the science on

the long term advantages to drug cheats who were caught and banned and given the

chance to compete again? Can we ever truly know how much of a foundation the

drug-fuelled training laid down for them?

I would like to think that this ('s inspirational value) is what the

decision was actually based on, regardless of the scientific data. And I dare

say if he were running 40 secs flat they would have decided the other way!

All of that said, I do kind of agree with Jimson Lee, that he should choose

between the Olympics and the Paraolympics. After all, he fought so hard for the

right to mix it with the able-bodied boys. But I suppose he has a loyalty and a

duty to that community too.

By the way Ken, I'm a big fan of your articles. It's great to be able to learn

from someone with so much experience, who is constantly pushing the envelope.

Keep up the great work!

Best regards

Bense

Masters Athlete (100m 200m 400m)

London

United Kingdom

>

> Hi !

>

> Good to hear from you!

>

> My kids still refer to you as the " Deadlift Diva " That is a cool nickname!

>

>

>

> I think the OP story has divided the research community, at least there are

> disagreement among the seven who were originally involved in testing

> Pistorius relative to the what the blades were allowing him to do.

>

> Two of the members of that research team ( Weyand and Matt Bundle)

> have never backed off their position regarding what their data show relative

> to Pistorius's swing time--an indication of a clear advantage.

>

> However, the facts behind the CAS ruling really have been misreported to

> the point that Bundle/Weyand issued the following in an effort to present

> the actual facts.

>

> Misreported Incorrect Item 1 - The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)

> ruled that Mr. Pistorius’ artificial limbs DO NOT provide an advantage vs.

> intact limbs during sprint running.

> Fact †" The publicly available ruling of the CAS indicates that the issue

> the court considered was whether the specific eligibility ban imposed on Mr.

> Pistorius by the IAAF was scientifically valid or not.

> Fact - The court DID NOT rule “no advantage†for Mr. Pistorius. Rather,

> the court overturned the IAAF’s eligibility ban due to the inadequate

> supporting evidence offered by the IAAF. In the very ruling that overturned

the

> ban, the CAS specifically pointed out that Mr. Pistorius blades may, in fact,

> provide a competitive advantage.

>

> Misreported Incorrect Item 2 †" Bundle and Weyand testified

> before the CAS that the artificial limbs of Pistorius DO NOT PROVIDE a

> competitive advantage and at a later time reversed themselves and stated

> that Mr. Pistorius’ artificial limbs DO PROVIDE an advantage.

> Fact †" First, neither of us were present at the CAS hearing. Second, since

> we first reviewed the data obtained in Dr Weyand’s laboratory in the

> spring of 2008 we have been completely consistent in our public and

scientific

> communications in stating:

> 1) The scientific rationale put forth by the IAAF leading to Pistorius’

> ban in 2007, was not valid, and

> 2) The entirely distinct data that we collected and published with Drs.

> Herr, Kram and others, indicate that the carbon fiber prostheses worn by Mr.

> Pistorius provide major competitive advantages vs. biological limbs.

>

> Misreported Incorrect Item 3 †" The 11.9 second advantage over 400-meters

> provided to Mr. Pistorius by his artificial limbs is a “back of the envelope

> calculation†that has never been peer-reviewed.

> Fact †" All of the data used to quantify the advantage that Mr. Pistorius’

> blades provide was published after peer-review and with Drs. Herr and Kram

> as co-authors. These data first appeared in an original manuscript that

> was published in the print version of the Journal of Applied Physiology in

> April 2009.

> A second peer-reviewed paper presented the analysis that used the

> previously published data to quantify Mr. Pistorius’ 11.9 second advantage

over

> 400-meter race. This second manuscript was a point/counterpoint contribution

> that also appeared in the Journal of Applied Physiology. The peer review of

> this second manuscript was conducted in accordance with the Journal’s

> policy as described on its website:

> “Articles in the pro-and-con series are subject to peer-review by the

> editor and editorial consultants, and acceptance cannot be guaranteed in

> advance.â€

> Our point/counterpoint manuscript was reviewed and accepted by the former

> editor-in-chief of the Journal.

> The two quantitative relationships used to determine the magnitude of Mr.

> Pistorius’ advantage first appeared in respective papers published in 2000

> and 2003. The supporting data bases in the original and subsequent papers

> include hundreds of all-out running trials that validated the accuracy of

> these relationships to within 3.5% or less.

>

> Misunderstood Item 4 †" Why did Weyand and Bundle wait until

> 18 months after the CAS Hearing to make their conclusions public?

> Answer 4 †" Because doing so was the only responsible, fair and

> scientifically credible way to disseminate our research findings that Mr.

Pistorius’

> artificial limbs do indeed provide a major competitive advantage.

> The least responsible course of action would have been to release our

> advantage conclusion without: 1) the supporting data and analysis, and 2)

> without peer review by other scientists. Early public release of our

conclusion

> without data, a supporting analysis and peer-review would have brought about

> confusion for all, been unfair to Mr. Pistorius, other athletes, policy

> makers, and the public. This course also would have violated the well-founded

> conventions for the ethical, responsible dissemination of scientific

> information and conclusions.

>

> One result of the scientific disagreement among researchers working on the

> Pistorius project was that the peer-review publication process necessarily

> involved two steps, a first publication authored by all that introduced the

> relevant data, and a second in which we were able to publish our advantage

> analysis and conclusions alongside an alternative conclusion offered by

> Drs. Kram and Herr. Because each round of the peer-review process typically

> takes a minimum of one to two months after the lengthy process of manuscript

> preparation, we were fortunate to publish the two papers as quickly as we

> did. "

>

> I hope this helps. I've had an interest/involvment in double BTK amputees

> since former paralympic champion Tony Volptentest compteted on my school

> track here in Lisle back in '97--years before Pistorius and his carbon fiber

> blades became an issue.

>

> Respectfully,

>

> Ken Jakalski

> Lisle Senior High School

> Lisle, IL USA

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I feel I should mention that I recently saw Pistorius run in the

Prefontaine Classic. While the 'blades' may have mechanical advantage they

definitely have limitation, especially in initial acceleration. Watch videos of

his running in elite races and you can see what I observed. Also, his stride

mechanics have to be different from full bodied runners. One might ask if the

innate human movement pattern for running is really that compatible for that

needed for blade running. I'm referencing the perspective of Esther Thelen's

Dynamic Systems Theory.

As an aside, I feel privileged to see world elite track and field athletes

compete regularly in Eugene. It's a great venue to watch varying coordination

patterns and performance.

Ken Largent

Bend, Oregon