Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kadath
The idea that he has access to something that other sprinters do not is false. They have access to something he does not: natural legs. If they want his advantage they can always cut their legs off and get prosthetics.
|
Well, the second suggestion is just a strawman. No one is rationally suggesting that anyone amputate body parts to enhance their competitive advantage.
As for the first, the idea is true, despite what you think. First, lack of legs means a lower weight that will not be compesated for with the prothetics. That is a competitive advantage no matter how you look at it. Second, the way these legs work creates an unnaturally long stride, and that is a huge competitive advantage.
Track and field is the most basic of all sports (except maybe swimming). All the competitions are absolute, and everyone knows exactly where they stand in the pecking order and publications like Track and Field News make sure that everyone knows where everyone else is down to the hundredth of a second or the nearest centimeter. With the exception of the pole vault, no tools are used in any event, and all are either a measure of strength or speed over an agreed-upon distance. In my opinion (as an admitted track geek), it is competition at its purest. Allowing ANY kind of prosthetics such as these will be detrimental to the sport since there is no limit on where they will end. Jet shoes for fallen arches? Cow catchers for hurdlers? In-race oxygen masks for marathoners?
Once you allow anyone to use a prosthetic in track, you're going to have a hard time keeping anyone else from using one. Doping is bad enough, let's not make things worse.